Edc ifrc me-guide-8-2011

www.ifrc.org
Saving lives, changing minds.
Project/programme
monitoring and evaluation
(M&E) guide

Acknowledgements
This guide was developed by the Planning and Evaluation Department
(PED) of the IFRC Secretariat. It would not have been possible without
the invaluable review and feedback from National Societies. In
particular, we want to express our thanks to the British Red Cross, the
Danish Red Cross, the Norwegian Red Cross, the Swedish Red Cross,
the Finnish Red Cross, the American Red Cross, the Australian Red
Cross, and the Canadian Red Cross. Also, special thanks to Julie Smith
for her creative cartoons and M&E sense of humour.
© International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, 2011
Copies of all or part of this guide may be made for
noncommercial use, providing the source is acknowledged
The IFRC would appreciate receiving details of its use.
Requests for commercial reproduction should be directed to
the IFRC at secretariat@ifrc.org
The designations and maps used do not imply the expression
of any opinion on the part of the International Federation or
National Societies concerning the legal status of a territory or
of its authorities.
All photos used in this guide are copyright of the IFRC unless
otherwise indicated. Cover photo, from left to right, clockwise:
Benoit Matsha-Carpentier/IFRC, Arzu Ozsoy/IFRC, Alex
Wynter/IFRC.
P.O. Box 372
CH-1211 Geneva 19
Switzerland
Telephone: +41 22 730 4222
Telefax: +41 22 733 0395
E-mail: secretariat@ifrc.org
Web site: www.ifrc.org
Project/programme monitoring and evaluation (M&E) guide
1000400 E 3,000 08/2011
Strategy 2020 voices the collective determination of
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies (IFRC) to move forward in tackling
the major challenges that confront humanity in the
next decade.Informed by the needs and vulnerabilities
of the diverse communities with whom we work, as
well as the basic rights and freedoms to which all are
entitled, this strategy seeks to benefit all who look
to Red Cross Red Crescent to help to build a more
humane, dignified and peaceful world.
Over the next ten years, the collective focus of the
IFRC will be on achieving the following strategic aims:
1. Save lives, protect livelihoods, and strengthen
recovery from disasters and crises
2. Enable healthy and safe living
3. Promote social inclusion and a culture
of non-violence and peace

1
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements inside cover
Abbreviations and Acronyms 4
Introduction 5
PART 1: M&E concepts and considerations 9
1.1 Results-based management (RBM) 9
1.2 M&E and the project/programme cycle 10
1.3 What is monitoring? 11
1.4 What is evaluation? 13
1.5 Baseline and endline studies 17
1.6 Comparing monitoring, evaluation, reviews and audits 19
1.7 M&E standards and ethics 20
1.8 Attention to gender and vulnerable groups 21
1.9 Minimize bias and error 22
PART 2: Six key steps for project/programme M&E 25
2.1 STEP 1 – Identify the purpose and scope of the M&E system 27
2.1.1 Review the project/programme’s operational design (logframe) 27
2.1.2 Identify key stakeholder informational needs and expectations 29
2.1.3 Identify any M&E requirements 30
2.1.4 Scope of major M&E events and functions 30
2.2 STEP 2 – Plan for data collection and management 32
2.2.1 Develop an M&E plan table 32
2.2.2 Assess the availability of secondary data 33
2.2.3 Determine the balance of quantitative and qualitative data 35
2.2.4 Triangulate data collection sources and methods 36
2.2.5 Determine sampling requirements 36
2.2.6 Prepare for any surveys 38
2.2.7 Prepare specific data collection methods/tools 38
2.2.8 Establish stakeholder complaints and feedback mechanisms 40
2.2.9 Establish project/programme staff/volunteers review mechanisms 42
2.2.10 Plan for data management 43
2.2.11 Use an indicator tracking table (ITT) 45
2.2.12 Use a risk log (table) 47
2.3 STEP 3 – Plan for data analysis 48
2.3.1 Develop a data analysis plan 49
2.3.2 Follow the key data analysis stages 50
2.4 STEP 4 – Plan for information reporting and utilization 57
2.4.1 Anticipate and plan for reporting 58
2.4.2 Plan for information utilization 66
2.5 STEP 5 – Plan for M&E human resources and capacity building 69

2
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project/programme monitoring and evaluation guide
2.5.1 Assess the project/programme’s human resources capacity for M&E 69
2.5.2 Determine the extent of local participation 69
2.5.3 Determine the extent of outside expertise 72
2.5.4 Define the roles and responsibilities for M&E 72
2.5.5 Plan to manage project/programme team’s M&E activities 73
2.5.6 Identify M&E capacity-building requirements and opportunities 73
2.6 STEP 6 – Prepare the M&E budget 74
2.6.1 Itemize M&E budget needs 74
2.6.2 Incorporate M&E costs in the project/programme budget 74
2.6.3 Review any donor budget requirements and contributions 75
2.6.4 Plan for cost contingency 75
ANNEXES 77
Annex 1: Glossary of key terms for M&E 77
Annex 2: M&E resources 83
Annex 3: Factors affecting the quality of M&E information 88
Annex 4: Checklist for the six key M&E steps 90
Annex 5: IFRC’s logframe – definition of terms 92
Annex 6: Example M&E stakeholder assessment table 93
Annex 7: Example M&E activity planning table 95
Annex 8: M&E plan table template and instructions 96
M&E plan example 97
M&E plan purpose and compliance 98
M&E plan instructions 98
Annex 9: Closed-ended questions examples 100
Annex 10: Key data collection methods and tools 101
Annex 11: Project/programme feedback form template 103
Annex 12: Complaints log 104
Annex 13: Staff/volunteer performance management template 105
Annex 14: Individual time resourcing sheet 106
Annex 15: Project/programme team time resourcing sheet 107
Annex 16: Indicator tracking table (ITT) examples and instructions 108
Annex 17: Example risk log 113
Annex 18: Reporting schedule 114
Annex 19: IFRC’s project/programme management report – template and instructions 115
Annex 20: Example tables (logs) for action planning and management response 122
Annex 21: Example M&E job description 123
Annex 22: M&E training schedule 127
List of tables, boxes and diagrams
Table 1: Common types of monitoring 12
Table 2: Summary of major evaluation types 15
Table 3: The IFRC’s framework for evaluation – criteria and standards 17
Table 4: Comparing key features of monitoring/review, evaluation and audit 20
Table 5: Example of indicator tracking table – for one quarter only 46
Table 6: Comparing data analysis terms: findings, conclusions, recommendations and actions 56

3
Box 1: Principle Nine of the Conduct for International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief 6
Box 2: Monitoring best practices 13
Box 3: The challenge of measuring impact 18
Box 4: Principle Five of the Code of Conduct for International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Box 5: M&E in emergency settings 27
Box 6: Types of industry (standard) indicators 28
Box 7: Examples of IFRC’s key stakeholders and informational needs 29
Box 8: Specific evaluation requirements for the IFRC’s secretariat-funded projects/programmes 30
Box 9: Examples of key M&E activities 31
Box 10: Is an M&E plan worth all the time and effort? 33
Box 11: Comparing quantitative versus qualitative data 35
Box 12: Minimizing data collection costs 40
Box 13: The IFRC’s guide for stakeholder feedback 42
Box 14: Formats can reinforce critical analysis and use 44
Box 15: The importance of target setting 47
Box 16: Benefits of involving multiple stakeholders in data analysis 50
Box 17: Data analysis questions to help describe the data 52
Box 18: Using traffic lights to highlight data 55
Box 19: Criteria of good reporting 58
Box 20: Internal versus external reporting 60
Box 21: Example reporting formats 62
Box 22: Report writing tips 63
Box 23: IFRC’s project/programme management report outline (refer to Annex 19 for full template) 64
Box 24: Reporting roadblocks and solutions 65
Box 25: Key categories of information use 66
Box 26: Key mediums of information dissemination 66
Box 27: Principle Seven of the Conduct for International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Box 28: Considering participatory M&E 71
Box 29: Adhering to human resources codes and standards – People in Aid 73
Box 30: How much money should be allocated for M&E? 75
Diagram 1: Key M&E activities in the project/programme cycle 10
Diagram 2: Monitoring questions and the logframe 11
Diagram 3: Evaluation questions and the logframe 14
Diagram 4: An example of information flows in project/programme reporting 61
Diagram 5: The participatory continuum 70

4
Abbreviations and Acronyms
DAC Development Assistance Committee
FWRS Federation-Wide Reporting System
HNS Host National Society
HR human resources
ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross
IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies
IT information technology
ITT indicator tracking table
M&E monitoring and evaluation
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
NGO non-governmental organization
OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation Development
ONS Operational National Society
PED planning and evaluation department
PMER planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting
PNS Participating National Society
RBM results-based management
RTE real-time evaluation
SMART specific, measurable, achievable, relevant,
time-bound
SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
ToR terms of reference
VCA vulnerability and capacity assessment

5
What is this guide?
The purpose of this guide is to promote a common understanding and reliable practice
of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for IFRC project/programmes. It is meant to be
a desktop reference that supplements the more concise and field-friendly IFRC
PMER Pocket Guide. Therefore, this guide is not intended to be read from cover to
cover; the reader can refer to specific topics for more detail when needed.
This guide does not provide detailed guidance on conducting evaluations; this is pro-
vided in separate IFRC resources.1
Instead, emphasis is placed on establishing
and implementing a project/programme monitoring and related reporting
system. However, as evaluation is integrally linked to monitoring, an overview
of evaluation is included for planning evaluation events within the overall M&E
system.
Who is the intended audience?
This guide is intended for people managing projects/programmes in National Red
Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the secretariat. However, it has been de-
signed to be understood by multiple other users as well, including IFRC staff
and volunteers, donors and partners. Although it has been designed for use at
the country level, the basic principles can be applied to projects/programmes
at other levels.
Introduction
1 A guide for managing
evaluations will be available
from the IFRC’s planning and
education department (PED).

6
Why is M&E important?
A well-functioning M&E system is a critical part of good project/programme
management and accountability. Timely and reliable M&E provides informa-
tion to:
ÔÔ Support project/programme implementation with accurate, evidence-
based reporting that informs management and decision-making to guide and
improve project/programme performance.
ÔÔ Contribute to organizational learning and knowledge sharing by reflecting
upon and sharing experiences and lessons so that we can gain the full benefit
from what we do and how we do it.
ÔÔ Uphold accountability and compliance by demonstrating whether or not
our work has been carried out as agreed and in compliance with established
standards (e.g. the Red Cross and Red Crescent Fundamental Principles and
Code of Conduct – see Box 1) and with any other donor requirements.2
ÔÔ Provide opportunities for stakeholder feedback, especially beneficiaries, to
provide input into and perceptions of our work, modelling openness to criti-
cism, and willingness to learn from experiences and to adapt to changing needs.
ÔÔ Promote and celebrate our work by highlighting our accomplishments and
achievements, building morale and contributing to resource mobilization.3
Box 1: Principle Nine of the Conduct for International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief
We hold ourselves accountable to both those we seek to assist and those
from whom we accept resources. We often act as an institutional link in
the partnership between those who wish to assist and those who need as-
sistance during disasters. We therefore hold ourselves accountable to both
constituencies. All our dealings with donors and beneficiaries shall reflect
an attitude of openness and transparency. We recognize the need to report
on our activities, both from a financial perspective and the perspective of
effectiveness. We recognize the obligation to ensure appropriate monitoring
of aid distributions and to carry out regular assessments of the impact of
disaster assistance. We will also seek to report, in an open fashion, upon
the impact of our work, and the factors limiting or enhancing that impact.
Our programmes will be based upon high standards of professionalism and
expertise in order to minimize the wasting of valuable resources.
What about other IFRC
resources?
This guide and its pocket companion, the IFRC PMER Pocket Guide, replace
prior versions of IFRC M&E guidance (primarily the Handbook for Monitoring and
Evaluation, and the Monitoring and Evaluation in a Nutshell), using updated ter-
minology and approaches that are consistent with the newly revised Project/
Programme Planning Guidance Manual (IFRC PPP, 2010).
2 IFRC adopts the OECD/DAC
definition of accountability,
(see the Glossary of Key Terms
in Annex 1). In addition to its
own Fundamental Principles
and Code of Conduct, it also
endorses other internationally
recognized standards, such
as the Sphere Standards to
enhance accountability of
humanitarian assistance to
people affected by disasters,
and the Good Enough Guide
for impact measurement and
accountability in emergencies
(both developed by a coalition
of leading international
humanitarian organizations and
are listed in Annex 2,
M&E Resources).
3 The use of M&E for resource
mobilization should not be
perceived as a pure marketing
tactic because assessments of
our performance and results
help demonstrate the returns
we get from the investment of
resources, lending credibility
to our achievements.
Advice for the reader
Refer to the additional
resources in Annex 2,
which includes both
IFRC resources for PMER
by project/programme
and focus area, as
well as other useful
resources from the in-
ternational community.

7
We understand that this guide is not exhaustive of M&E. Within the IFRC, project/
programme areas may develop M&E guidance specific to their technicality; in
such cases, this guide is meant to complement such resources. Outside the
IFRC, there are numerous M&E resources in the international community,
and an effort has been made to highlight some of these additional resources
throughout this guide.
Diagram 1 of the Key M&E Activities in the Project/Programme Cycle (Section 1.2,
page 10) summarizes some of the key planning, monitoring, evaluation, and
reporting (PMER) resources in IFRC for the major stages of the project/pro-
gramme cycle. Additional resources are listed in Annex 2, M&E Resources.
How to best use this guide?
This guide is divided into three parts: Part 1 focuses conceptually on important
major M&E considerations; Part 2 focuses practically on six key steps for pro-
ject/programme M&E; and the Annexes present additional tools, resources and
examples for project/programme M&E.
Throughout the guide, an effort has been made to highlight important points
and resources with boxes, diagrams, tables and bold text. Also note that key
resources in the Annexes, such as the M&E plan, indicator tracking table (ITT),
and project/programme management report, include instructions so that they
can be printed as a “take-away” guide for the respective tool.
All cited resources in this guide are referenced as a footnote on the cited page.
Annex 2 provides citations of additional resources outside of this guide.
Hyperlinks have been formatted in brown for key resources that can be ac-
cessed online. (When using this guide on a computer connected to the internet,
clicking the hyperlinked resource will take you to its location on the internet.)
Feedback and revision
This guide will be periodically reviewed and updated to take account of learning
gained from use in the field, and to ensure it continues to conform to the
highest international standards. Feedback or questions can be directed to the
IFRC planning and evaluation department (PED) at secretariat@ifrc.org, or P.O.
Box 372, CH-1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland.
It may be helpful as
you use the key to refer
to: the Glossary of key
M&E terms in Annex 1,
Diagram 1 of the key
M&E activities in the
project/programme cycle
(Section 1.2), and the
Checklist for the six key
M&E steps (Annex 4).

8
IFRC

9
What you will find in Part 1:
1.1 Results-based management (RBM)
1.2 M&E and the project/programme cycle
1.3 What is monitoring?
1.4 What is evaluation?
1.5 Baseline and endline studies
1.6 Comparing monitoring, evaluation, reviews and audits
1.7 M&E standards and ethics
1.8 Attention to gender and vulnerable groups
1.9 Minimize bias and error
Part 1 provides an overview of key M&E concepts and considerations to in-
form planning and implementing effective monitoring and evaluation. This is
supplemented by a Glossary of Key Terms in Annex 1.
1.1 Results-based management
(RBM)
RBM is an approach to project/programme management based on clearly defined
results, and the methodologies and tools to measure and achieve them. RBM sup-
ports better performance and greater accountability by applying a clear, logical
framework to plan, manage and measure an intervention with a focus on the
results you want to achieve. By identifying in advance the intended results of
a project/programme and how we can measure their progress, we can better
manage a project/programme and determine whether a difference has genu-
inely been made for the people concerned.4
Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is a critical part of RBM. It forms the basis for
clear and accurate reporting on the results achieved by an intervention (project
or programme). In this way, information reporting is no longer a headache, but
becomes an opportunity for critical analysis and organizational learning, in-
forming decision-making and impact assessment.
Part 1.
M&E concepts
and considerations
4 Results-based management
(RBM) is an approach that
has been adopted by many
international organizations.
RBM is explained in more
detail in the IFRC Project/
Programme Planning Guidance
Manual (IFRC PPP, 2010).

10
1.2 M&E and the project/
programme cycle
Diagram 1 provides an overview of the usual stages and key activities in pro-
ject/programme planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting (PMER). We
write “usual” stages because there is no one generic project/programme cycle,
as each project/programme ultimately varies according to the local context
and need. This is especially true of emergency operations for which project/
programme implementation may begin immediately, before typical assessment
and planning in a longer-term development initiative.
DIAGRAM 1: Key M&E activities in the project/programme cycle*
* There is no one generic project/programme cycle and associated M&E activities. This figure is only a
representation meant to convey the relationships of generic M&E activities within a project/programme cycle.
The listed PMER activities will be discussed in more detail later in this guide.
For now, the following provides a brief summary of the PMER activities, and
Annex 2 provides additional resources for each stage:
1. Initial needs assessment. This is done to determine whether a project/pro-
gramme is needed and, if so, to inform its planning.
2. Logframe and indicators. This involves the operational design of the project/pro-
gramme and its objectives, indicators, means of verification and assumptions.
M&E
planning
Project design –
Logframe
Dissemination, use
of lessons and possible
longitudinal evaluation
Final evaluation
(endline survey)
Midterm evaluation
and/or reviews
Baseline
study
Initial needs
assessment
Ongoing
REPORTING,
REFLECTION AND
LEARNING
PROJECT
START
IMPLEM
EN
T
ATION,MONITORINGANDEVALUATION
INITIAL ASSESS
M
ENT
PLANNING
PROJECT
END
PROJECT
MIDDLE

11
3. M&E planning. This is the practical planning for the project/programme to
monitor and evaluate the logframe’s objectives and indicators.
4. Baseline study. This is the measurement of the initial conditions (appropriate
indicators) before the start of a project/programme.
5. Midterm evaluation and/or reviews. These are important reflection events to
assess and inform ongoing project/programme implementation.
6. Final evaluation. This occurs after project/programme completion to assess
how well the project/programme achieved its intended objectives and what
difference this has made.
7. Dissemination and use of lessons. This informs ongoing programming. How-
ever, reporting, reflection and learning should occur throughout the whole
project/programme cycle, which is why these have been placed in the centre
of the diagram.
1.3 What is monitoring?
Monitoring is the routine collection and analysis of information to track pro-
gress against set plans and check compliance to established standards. It
helps identify trends and patterns, adapt strategies and inform decisions for
project/programme management.
Diagram 2 summarizes key monitoring questions as they relate to the log-
frame’s objectives. Note that they focus more on the lower-level objectives – in-
puts, activities and (to a certain extent) outcomes. This is because the outcomes
and goal are usually more challenging changes (typically in knowledge, atti-
tudes and practice/behaviours) to measure, and require a longer time frame
and a more focused assessment provided by evaluations.
DIAGRAM 2: Monitoring questions and the logframe
Are activities being implemented on schedule
and within budget?
Are activities leading to the expected outputs?
Are outputs leading to achievement
of the outcomes?
What is causing
delays or unexpected
results?
Is there anything
happening that should
lead management to
modify the operation’s
implementation plan?
Are ﬁnance, personnel and materials available
on time and in the right quantities and quality?
Measuring changes at goal-level requires a longer time frame,
and is therefore dealt with by evaluation and not monitoring.
How do beneﬁciaries feel about the work?
Logframe objectives Monitoring questions
Outputs
Activities
Inputs
Goal
Outcomes

12
A project/programme usually monitors a variety of things according to its specific
informational needs. Table 1 provides a summary of the different types of moni-
toring commonly found in a project/programme monitoring system. It is impor-
tant to remember that these monitoring types often occur simultaneously as
part of an overall monitoring system.
TABLE 1: Common types of monitoring
Results monitoring tracks effects and impacts. This is where monitoring merges with evaluation to
determine if the project/programme is on target towards its intended results (outputs, outcomes, impact) and
whether there may be any unintended impact (positive or negative). For example, a psychosocial project may
monitor that its community activities achieve the outputs that contribute to community resilience and ability to
recover from a disaster.
Process (activity) monitoring tracks the use of inputs and resources, the progress of activities and
the delivery of outputs. It examines how activities are delivered – the efficiency in time and resources. It is
often conducted in conjunction with compliance monitoring and feeds into the evaluation of impact. For
example, a water and sanitation project may monitor that targeted households receive septic systems
according to schedule.
Compliance monitoring ensures compliance with donor regulations and expected results, grant and
contract requirements, local governmental regulations and laws, and ethical standards. For example, a
shelter project may monitor that shelters adhere to agreed national and international safety standards in
construction.
Context (situation) monitoring tracks the setting in which the project/programme operates, especially
as it affects identified risks and assumptions, but also any unexpected considerations that may arise.
It includes the field as well as the larger political, institutional, funding, and policy context that affect the
project/programme. For example, a project in a conflict-prone area may monitor potential fighting that
could not only affect project success but endanger project staff and volunteers.
Beneficiary monitoring tracks beneficiary perceptions of a project/programme. It includes beneficiary
satisfaction or complaints with the project/programme, including their participation, treatment, access to
resources and their overall experience of change. Sometimes referred to as beneficiary contact monitoring
(BCM), it often includes a stakeholder complaints and feedback mechanism (see Section 2.2.8). It should
take account of different population groups (see Section 1.9), as well as the perceptions of indirect
beneficiaries (e.g. community members not directly receiving a good or service). For example, a cash-for-
work programme assisting community members after a natural disaster may monitor how they feel about
the selection of programme participants, the payment of participants and the contribution the programme is
making to the community (e.g. are these equitable?).
Financial monitoring accounts for costs by input and activity within predefined categories of
expenditure. It is often conducted in conjunction with compliance and process monitoring. For example, a
livelihoods project implementing a series of micro-enterprises may monitor the money awarded and repaid,
and ensure implementation is according to the budget and time frame.
Organizational monitoring tracks the sustainability, institutional development and capacity building in
the project/programme and with its partners. It is often done in conjunction with the monitoring processes
of the larger, implementing organization. For example, a National Society’s headquarters may use
organizational monitoring to track communication and collaboration in project implementation among its
branches and chapters.

13
As we will discuss later in this guide (Part 2), there are various processes and
tools to assist with the different types of monitoring, which generally involve
obtaining, analysing and reporting on monitoring data. Specific processes and
tools may vary according to monitoring need, but there are some overall best
practices, which are summarized in Box 2 below.
BOX 2: Monitoring best practices
• Monitoring data should be well-focused to specific audiences and uses
(only what is necessary and sufficient).
• Monitoring should be systematic, based upon predetermined indicators
and assumptions.
• Monitoring should also look for unanticipated changes with the project/
programme and its context, including any changes in project/programme
assumptions/risks; this information should be used to adjust project/pro-
gramme implementation plans.
• Monitoring needs to be timely, so information can be readily used to in-
form project/programme implementation.
• Whenever possible, monitoring should be participatory, involving key
stakeholders – this can not only reduce costs but can build understanding
and ownership.
• Monitoring information is not only for project/programme management
but should be shared when possible with beneficiaries, donors and any
other relevant stakeholders.
1.4 What is evaluation?
The IFRC’s secretariat adopts the OECD/DAC definition of evaluation as “an
assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of an ongoing or completed
project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. The aim
is to determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, developmental ef-
ficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. An evaluation should provide
information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons
learned into the decision-making process of both recipients and donors.”5
Evaluations involve identifying and reflecting upon the effects of what has been
done, and judging their worth. Their findings allow project/programme man-
agers, beneficiaries, partners, donors and other project/programme stake-
holders to learn from the experience and improve future interventions.
Diagram 3 (below) summarizes key evaluation questions as they relate to the
logframe’s objectives, which tend to focus more on how things have been per-
formed and what difference has been made.
5 The Organization for
Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD)
is an inter-governmental
international organization
that brings together the most
industrialized countries of
the market economy with
the objective to coordinate
economic and development
policies of the member
nations. The Development
Assistance Committee (DAC)
is the principal body through
which the OECD deals with
issues related to cooperation
with developing countries.

14
DIAGRAM 3: Evaluation questions and the logframe
It is best to involve key stakeholders as much as possible in the evaluation process.
This includes National Society staff and volunteers, community members, local
authorities, partners, donors, etc. Participation helps to ensure different per-
spectives are taken into account, and it reinforces learning from and ownership
of the evaluation findings.
There is a range of evaluation types, which can be categorized in a variety of ways.
Ultimately, the approach and method used in an evaluation is determined by
the audience and purpose of the evaluation. Table 2 (next page) summarizes
key evaluation types according to three general categories. It is important to re-
member that the categories and types of evaluation are not mutually exclusive and
are often used in combination. For instance, a final external evaluation is a type
of summative evaluation and may use participatory approaches.
Logframe objectives Evaluation questions
Effectiveness
• Were the operation’s
objectives achieved?
• Did the outputs lead
to the intended outcomes?
Impact
• What changes did the project
bring about?
• Were there any unplanned
or unintended changes?
Efficiency
• Were stocks of items available on time and
in the right quantities and quality?
• Were activities implemented on schedule and within budget?
• Were outputs delivered economically?
Sustainability
• Are the benefits likely to be maintained
for an extended period after
assistance ends?
Relevance
• Were the operation’s objectives
consistent with beneficiaries’
needs and with Red Cross Red
Crescent policies?
Outputs
Activities
Inputs
Goal
Outcomes

15
Table 2: Summary of major evaluation types 6
According to
evaluation timing
According to who
conducts the evaluation
According to evaluation
technicality or methodology
Formative evaluations occur
during project/programme
implementation to improve
performance and assess
compliance.
Summative evaluations occur
at the end of project/programme
implementation to assess
effectiveness and impact.
Midterm evaluations are
formative in purpose and occur
midway through implementation.
For secretariat-funded projects/
programmes that run for
longer than 24 months, some
type of midterm assessment,
evaluation or review is required.
Typically, this does not need to
be independent or external, but
may be according to specific
assessment needs.
Final evaluations are
summative in purpose and are
conducted (often externally)
at the completion of project/
programme implementation to
assess how well the project/
programme achieved its intended
objectives. All secretariat-
funded projects/programmes
should have some form of final
assessment, whether it is internal
or external.
Internal or self-evaluations
are conducted by those
responsible for implementing a
project/programme. They can
be less expensive than external
evaluations and help build
staff capacity and ownership.
However, they may lack credibility
with certain stakeholders, such
as donors, as they are perceived
as more subjective (biased or
one-sided). These tend to be
focused on learning lessons
rather than demonstrating
accountability.
External or independent
evaluations are conducted
by evaluator(s) outside of the
implementing team, lending
it a degree of objectivity and
often technical expertise. These
tend to focus on accountability.
Secretariat-funded interventions
exceeding 1,000,000 Swiss
francs require an independent
final evaluation; if undertaken
by the project/programme
management, it should be
reviewed by the secretariat’s
planning and evaluation
department (PED), or by some
other independent quality
assurance mechanism approved
by the PED.
Real-time evaluations (RTEs)
are undertaken during project/
programme implementation to
provide immediate feedback
for modifications to improve
ongoing implementation.
Emphasis is on immediate
lesson learning over impact
evaluation or accountability.
RTEs are particularly useful
during emergency operations,
and are required in the first three
months of secretariat emergency
operations that meet any of the
following criteria: more than nine
months in length; plan to reach
100,000 people or more; the
emergency appeal is greater than
10,000,000 Swiss francs; more
than ten National Societies are
operational with staff in the field.
Meta-evaluations are
used to assess the evaluation
process itself. Some key uses
of meta-evaluations include:
take inventory of evaluations to
inform the selection of future
evaluations; combine evaluation
results; check compliance with
evaluation policy and good
practices; assess how well
evaluations are disseminated and
utilized for organizational learning
and change, etc.
6 All IFRC evaluation
requirements summarized in
the table are from the IFRC
Framework for Evaluation,
2010. Practice 5.4, p. 9.

16
Table 2: Summary of major evaluation types (continued)
According to
evaluation timing
According to who
conducts the evaluation
According to evaluation
technicality or methodology
Ex-post evaluations are
conducted some time after
implementation to assess long-
term impact and sustainability.
Participatory evaluations are
conducted with the beneficiaries
and other key stakeholders, and
can be empowering, building
their capacity, ownership and
support. (Section 2.5.2 discusses
further the use of participation in
M&E.)
Joint evaluations are
conducted collaboratively by
more than one implementing
partner, and can help build
consensus at different levels,
credibility and joint support.
Thematic evaluations focus
on one theme, such as gender or
environment, typically across a
number of projects, programmes
or the whole organization.
Cluster/sector evaluations
focus on a set of related activities,
projects or programmes, typically
across sites and implemented
by multiple organizations (e.g.
National Societies, the United
Nations and NGOs).
Impact evaluations focus
on the effect of a project/
programme, rather than
on its management and
delivery. Therefore, they
typically occur after project/
programme completion during
a final evaluation or an ex-post
evaluation. However, impact may
be measured during project/
programme implementation
during longer projects/
programmes and when feasible.
Box 3 (see Section 1.5) highlights
some of the challenges in
measuring impact.
IFRC Framework for Evaluation
Proper management of an evaluation is a critical element for its success. There
are multiple resources to support evaluation management. Most important is
the IFRC Framework for Evaluation, which identifies the key criteria and stand-
ards that guide how we plan, commission, conduct, report on and utilize evalu-
ations. The framework is to be applied to all evaluation activities by and for the
secretariat and to guide evaluations throughout the IFRC. It draws upon the
best practices from the international community to ensure accurate and reli-
able evaluations that are credible with stakeholders. Table 3, page 17, summa-
rizes the criteria and standards from the IFRC Framework for Evaluation.67

7 The framework and additional
M&E resources for conducting
and managing an evaluation
are listed in Annex 2, M&E
Resources, and guidance
for managing an evaluation
will be available from the
IFRC’s secretariat.

17
TABLE 3: The IFRC’s framework for evaluation – criteria and standards 8
Evaluation criteria guide to what we
evaluate in our work
Evaluation standards guide to how we
evaluate our work
ÆÆ IFRC’s standards and policies. The extent
that the IFRC’s work upholds the policies and
guidelines of the International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement.
ÆÆ Relevance and appropriateness. The extent
that the IFRC’s work is suited to the needs and
priorities of the target group and complements
work from other actors.
ÆÆ Efficiency. The extent that the IFRC’s work is
cost-effective and timely.
ÆÆ Effectiveness. The extent that the IFRC’s work
has or is likely to achieve its intended, immediate
results.
ÆÆ Coverage. The extent that the IFRC’s work
includes (or excludes) population groups and the
differential impact on these groups.
ÆÆ Impact. The extent that the IFRC’s work affects
positive and negative changes on stakeholders,
directly or indirectly, intended or unintended.
ÆÆ Coherence. The extent that the IFRC’s
work is consistent with relevant policies (e.g.
humanitarian, security, trade, military and
development), and takes adequate account of
humanitarian and human-rights considerations.
ÆÆ Sustainability and connectedness. The
extent the benefits of the IFRC’s work are likely
to continue once the IFRC’s role is completed.
1. Utility. Evaluations must be useful and used.
2. Feasibility. Evaluations must be realistic,
diplomatic and managed in a sensible, cost-
effective manner.
3. Ethics and legality. Evaluations must be
conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with
particular regard for the welfare of those involved
in and affected by the evaluation.
4. Impartiality and independence. Evaluations
should provide a comprehensive and unbiased
assessment that takes into account the views of all
stakeholders. With external evaluations, evaluators
should not be involved or have a vested interest in
the intervention being evaluated.
5. Transparency. Evaluation activities should
reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
6. Accuracy. Evaluations should be technically
accurate, providing sufficient information about
the data collection, analysis and interpretation
methods so that its worth or merit can be
determined.
7. Participation. Stakeholders should be consulted
and meaningfully involved in the evaluation
process when feasible and appropriate.
8. Collaboration. Collaboration between key
operating partners in the evaluation process
improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
1.5 Baseline and endline studies
A baseline study (sometimes just called “baseline”) is an analysis describing the
initial conditions (appropriate indicators) before the start of a project/programme,
against which progress can be assessed or comparisons made. An endline study is a
measure made at the completion of a project/programme (usually as part of its final
evaluation), to compare with baseline conditions and assess change. We discuss
baseline and endline studies together because if a baseline study is conducted,
it is usually followed by another similar study later in the project/programme
(e.g. an endline study) for comparison of data to determine impact.
Baseline and endline studies are not evaluations themselves, but an important part
of assessing change. They usually contribute to project/programme evaluation
(e.g. a final or impact evaluation), but can also contribute to monitoring changes
on longer-term projects/programmes. The benchmark data from a baseline is
used for comparison later in the project/programme and/or at its end (endline
study) to help determine what difference the project/programme has made
towards its objectives. This is helpful for measuring impact, which can be chal-
lenging, as Box 3 highlights on next page.
8 The criteria and standards
are largely based on
internationally recognized
practices, including the OECD’s
DAC criteria for evaluating
development assistance
(2000) and ALNAP’s Evaluation
humanitarian action using
OECD/DAC criteria (2006).

18
BOX 3: The challenge of measuring impact
The measurement of impact is challenging, can be costly and is widely debated.
This does not mean we should not try to measure impact; it is an important
part of being accountable to what we set out to achieve. However, we should
be cautious and understand some of the challenges in measuring impact.
Typically, impact involves longer-term changes, and it may take months or
years for such changes to become apparent. Furthermore, it can be difficult
to attribute observed changes to an intervention versus other factors (called
“attribution”). For example, if we measure changes (or no changes) in psycho-
logical well-being following a psychosocial project, is this due to the project/
programme, or other factors such as an outbreak of dengue fever or an eco-
nomic recession? Despite these challenges, there is increasing demand for
accountability among organizations working in humanitarian relief and de-
velopment. Therefore, careful consideration should be given to its measure-
ment, including the required time period, resources and specialized skills.
All secretariat-funded projects/programmes are required to have some form of base-
line study.9
Often a survey is used during a baseline, but a baseline does not al-
ways have to be quantitative, especially when it is not practical for the project/
programme budget and time frame. Sometimes it may be more appropriate to
use qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups, or a combination
of both quantitative and qualitative methods (see Section 2.2.3). Occasionally
the information from a needs assessment or vulnerability capacity assessment
(VCA) can be used in a baseline study. Whatever method is used, it is critical
that both the baseline and endline studies use the same indicators and meas-
urement methodologies so that they can be consistently and reliably measured
at different points in time for comparison.10
9 IFRC Framework for Evaluation,
2010. Practice 5.4, p. 9.
10 For some specific baseline
resources refer to Annex 2,
M&E Resources.

19
1.6 Comparing monitoring,
evaluation, reviews and audits
The main difference between monitoring and evaluation is their timing and focus of
assessment. Monitoring is ongoing and tends to focus on what is happening. On
the other hand, evaluations are conducted at specific points in time to assess
how well it happened and what difference it made. Monitoring data is typically
used by managers for ongoing project/programme implementation, tracking
outputs, budgets, compliance with procedures, etc. Evaluations may also in-
form implementation (e.g. a midterm evaluation), but they are less frequent and
examine larger changes (outcomes) that require more methodological rigour in
analysis, such as the impact and relevance of an intervention.
Recognizing their differences, it is also important to remember that both monitoring
and evaluation are integrally linked; monitoring typically provides data for evalu-
ation, and elements of evaluation (assessment) occur when monitoring. For ex-
ample, monitoring may tell us that 200 community facilitators were trained
(what happened), but it may also include post-training tests (assessments) on
how well they were trained. Evaluation may use this monitoring information to
assess any difference the training made towards the overall objective or change
the training was trying to produce, e.g. increase condom use, and whether this
was relevant in the reduction of HIV transmission.
A review is a structured opportunity for reflection to identify key issues and con-
cerns, and make informed decisions for effective project/programme implementa-
tion. While monitoring is ongoing, reviews are less frequent but not as involved
as evaluations. Also, IFRC typically uses reviews as an internal exercise, based
on monitoring data and reports. They are useful to share information and col-
lectively involve stakeholders in decision-making. They may be conducted at
different levels within the project/programme structure (e.g. at the community
level and at headquarters) and at different times and frequencies. Reviews can
also be conducted across projects or sectors. It is best to plan and structure
regular reviews throughout the project/programme implementation.
An audit is an assessment to verify compliance with established rules, regulations,
procedures or mandates. Audits can be distinguished from an evaluation in that
emphasis is on assurance and compliance with requirements, rather than a
judgement of worth. Financial audits provide assurance on financial records
and practices, whereas performance audits focus on the three E’s – efficiency,
economy and effectiveness of project/programme activities. Audits can be in-
ternal or external.
Table 4 (next page) summarizes the key differences between monitoring, eval-
uation and audits.

20
TABLE 4: Comparing key features of monitoring/review, evaluation and audit*
Monitoring & Reviews Evaluations Audits
Why? Check progress,
inform decisions and
remedial action, update
project plans, support
accountability
Assess progress and
worth, identify lessons
and recommendations for
longer-term planning and
organizational learning;
provide accountability
Ensure compliance and
provide assurance and
accountability
When? Ongoing during project/
programme
Periodic and after project/
programme
According to (donor)
requirement
Who? Internal, involving project/
programme implementers
Can be internal or external
to organization
Typically external to
project/programme, but
internal or external to
organization
Link to logical
hierarchy
Focus on inputs, activities,
outputs and shorter-term
outcomes
Focus on outcomes and
overall goal
Focus on inputs, activities
and outputs
* Adopted from White, Graham and Wiles, Peter. 2008. Monitoring Templates for Humanitarian Organizations. Commissioned by the European
Commission Director-General for Humanitarian AID (DG ECHO); p. 40.
1.7 M&E standards and ethics
M&E involves collecting, analysing and communicating information about
people – therefore, it is especially important that M&E is conducted in an ethical
and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and
affected by it.
International standards and best practices help to protect stakeholders and to
ensure that M&E is accountable to and credible with them. The following is a
list of key standards and practices for ethical and accountable M&E:
ÔÔ M&E should uphold the principles and standards of the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement. The most important are the Fundamental Prin-
ciples of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (see inside
back cover) and the Code of Conduct for International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief (see inside back cover). But
this also includes other key Red Cross Red Crescent policies and procedures,
such as the IFRC Framework for Evaluation (discussed above).
ÔÔ M&E should respect the customs, culture and dignity of human subjects – this is
consistent with the fifth Code of Conduct (see Box 4 on page 21), as well as the
United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This includes differ-
ences due to religion, gender, disability, age, sexual orientation and ethnicity
(discussed below). Cultural sensitivity is especially important when collecting
data on sensitive topics (e.g. domestic violence or contraceptive usage), from
vulnerable and marginalized groups (e.g. internally displaced people or mi-
norities), and following psychosocial trauma (e.g. natural disaster or conflict).
Section 1.8 provides further discussion on marginalized groups.

21
BOX 4: Principle Five of the Code of Conduct for International Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief
We shall respect culture and custom. We will endeavour to respect the
culture, structures and customs of the communities and countries we are
working in.
ÔÔ M&E practices should uphold the principle of “do no harm”. Data collectors and
those disseminating M&E reports should be respectful that certain information
can endanger or embarrass respondents.“Under this circumstance, evaluators
should seek to maximize the benefits and reduce any unnecessary harm that
might occur, provided this will not compromise the integrity of the evaluation
findings” (American Evaluation Association 2004). Participants in data collec-
tion have the legal and ethical responsibility to report any evidence of criminal
activity or wrongdoing that may harm others (e.g. alleged sexual abuse).
ÔÔ When feasible and appropriate, M&E should be participatory. Local involve-
ment supports the sixth and seventh Principles of Conduct to find ways to
involve beneficiaries and build local capacities. Stakeholder consultation and
involvement in M&E increases the legitimacy and utility of M&E information,
as well as overall cooperation and support for and ownership of the process.
(Section 2.5.2 in Part 2 discusses participation in the M&E system.)
ÔÔ An M&E system should ensure that stakeholders can provide comment and voice
any complaints about the IFRC’s work. This also includes a process for review-
ing and responding concerns/grievances. (Section 2.2.8 in Part 2 discusses
building stakeholder complaints and feedback mechanisms into the overall
M&E system.)
1.8 Attention to gender and
vulnerable groups
Data collection, analysis and reporting should strive for a balanced repre-
sentation of any potentially vulnerable or marginalized groups. This includes
attention to differences and inequalities in society related to gender, race, age,
sexual orientation, physical or intellectual ability, religion or socioeconomic
status. This is especially important for Red Cross Red Crescent services, which
are provided on the basis of need alone.11
Therefore, it is important to collect
and analyse data so that it can be disaggregated by sex, age and any other social
distinctions that inform programme decision-making and implementation.
Particular attention should be given to a gender-balanced representation. The
example of health care, an important programme area for IFRC illustrates this.
Gender refers to economic, social, political and cultural differences (including
opportunities) with being male or female. Due to social (gender) and biological
(sex) differences, women and men can have different health behaviours and
risks, as well as different experiences from health services. In most societies,
women have less access to and control over health resources and service for
themselves and their children. Gender norms can also affect men by assigning
them roles that encourage risk-taking behaviour and neglect of their and their
family’s health. Furthermore, gender interacts with other social differences,
such as race, age and class.
11 Principle 2 of the Code of
Conduct for International
Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement and
NGOs in Disaster Relief.

22
Gender inequalities especially affect sexually transmitted infections among
women and men. A gender-sensitive approach in health care recognizes both
sex and gender differences and seeks to provide equal access to treatment
and services for both women and men. Therefore, data collection and analysis
should focus on how differences between women and men may affect equal ac-
cess to health services. This can involve attention during data collection to ac-
cess to health services among women versus men; such disaggregation of data
by sex (and age) is a good starting point for such analysis (Global Fund 2009).
1.9 Minimize bias and error
M&E helps uphold accountability, and should therefore be accountable in it-
self. This means that the M&E process should be accurate, reliable and credible
with stakeholders. Consequently, an important consideration when doing M&E
is that of bias. Bias occurs when the accuracy and precision of a measurement is
threatened by the experience, perceptions and assumptions of the researcher, or by
the tools and approaches used for measurement and analysis.
Minimizing bias helps to increase accuracy and precision. Accuracy means that
the data measures what it is intended to measure. For example, if you are trying
to measure knowledge change following a training session, you would not just
measure how many people were trained but also include some type of test of
any knowledge change.
Similarly, precision means that data measurement can be repeated accurately and
consistently over time and by different people. For instance, if we use a survey to
measures people’s attitudes for a baseline study, two years later the same survey
should be administered during an endline study in the same way for precision.
Resource tip
Annex 2 has additional
resources on M&E and
vulnerable and margin-
alized people, as well
as quality control and
minimizing bias/error
in the M&E system.

23
As much as we would like to eliminate bias and error in our measurements and
information reporting, no research is completely without bias. Nevertheless,
there are precautions that can be taken, and the first is to be familiar with the
major types of bias we encounter in our work:
a. Selection bias results from poor selection of the sample population to meas-
ure/study. Also called design bias or sample error, it occurs when the people,
place or time period measured is not representative of the larger population
or condition being studied. It is a very important concept to understand be-
cause there is a tendency to study the most successful and/or convenient
sites or populations to reach (which are often the same). For example, if data
collection is done during a convenient time of the day, during the dry sea-
son or targets communities easily accessible near paved roads, it may not
accurately represent the conditions being studied for the whole population.
Such “selection bias” can exclude those people in greatest need – which goes
against IFRC’s commitment to provide aid on the basis of need alone.12
b. Measurement bias results from poor data measurement – either due to a
fault in the data measurement instrument or the data collector. Sometimes
the direct measurement may be done incorrectly, or the attitudes of the inter-
viewer may influence how questions are asked and responses are recorded.
For instance, household occupancy in a disaster response operation may be
calculated incorrectly, or survey questions may be written in a way that bi-
ases the response, e.g. “Why do you like this project?” (rather than “What do
you think of this project?”).
c. Processing error results from the poor management of data – miscoded data,
incorrect data entry, incorrect computer programming and inadequate check-
ing. This source of error is particularly common with the entry of quantitative
(statistical) data, for which specific practices and checks have been developed.
d. Analytical bias results from the poor analysis of collected data. Different ap-
proaches to data analysis generate varying results e.g. the statistical methods
employed, or how the data is separated and interpreted. A good practice to
help reduce analytical bias is to carefully identify the rationale for the data
analysis methods.
It is beyond the scope of this guide to fully cover the topic of bias and error and
how to minimize them.13
However, many of the precautions for bias and error
are topics in the next section of this guide. For instance, triangulating (com-
bining) sources and methods in data collection can help reduce error due to
selection and measurement bias. Data management systems can be designed
to verify data accuracy and completeness, such as cross-checking figures with
other data sources or computer double-entry and post-data entry verification
when possible. A participatory approach to data analysis can help to include dif-
ferent perspectives and reduce analytical bias. Also, stakeholders should have
the opportunity to review data products for accuracy.
12 Principle 2 of the Code of
Conduct for International
Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement and
NGOs in Disaster Relief.
13 Additional resources for
reducing bias and error
and improving data quality
in M&E can be found in
Annex 2, M&E Resources.
Resource tip
Annex 3 provides a list
of real examples from
the field of factors af-
fecting the quality of
M&E information.

24
IFRC

25
The six key M&E steps discussed in Part 2 are:
1. Identify the purpose and scope of the M&E system
2. Plan for data collection and management
3. Plan for data analysis
4. Plan for information reporting and utilization
5. Plan for M&E human resources and capacity building
6. Prepare the M&E budget
Part 2 builds upon the key M&E concepts presented in Part 1, outlining six
key steps for project/programme M&E. Taken together, these steps are to guide
planning for and implementing an M&E system for the systematic, timely and
effective collection, analysis and use of project/programme information.
Key reminders for all M&E steps:
ÔÔ The M&E steps are interconnected and should be viewed as part of a mutually
supportive M&E system. We identify separate steps to help organize and guide
the discussion. In reality, these steps are not necessarily separate, but inter-
related, often happening simultaneously. For example, what data is collected
will largely depend on the data needed to be reported – one step is integral to
the other step and would be planned at the same time.
ÔÔ M&E planning should be done by those who use the information. Involvement
of project/programme staff and key stakeholders ensures feasibility, under-
standing and ownership of the M&E system. M&E planning should not be
limited to a headquarters’ office, but informed by the realities and practicali-
ties of the field. The leadership of an experienced project/programme man-
ager, ideally experienced in M&E, is very helpful to ensure M&E activities are
well adapted and within the project/programme’s time frame and capacity.
ÔÔ Begin planning for your M&E system immediately after the project/programme
design stage (see Diagram 1). Early M&E planning allows for preparation of
adequate time, resources and personnel before project/programme imple-
mentation. It also informs the project/programme design process itself as it re-
quires people to realistically consider how practical it is to do everything they
intend to measure. Sometimes, the timing of the M&E planning is determined
Part 2.
Six key steps
for project/programme
M&E
The Checklist – six
key steps for project
and programme M&E
(Annex 4) – provides a
useful overview of the
key steps and related
resources.

26
by donor requirements (e.g. at the proposal stage), and additional M&E plan-
ning may occur after a project/programme is approved and funded.
ÔÔ A project/programme M&E system builds upon the initial assessment and project/
programme design. At IFRC, it is based on the short-term, intermediate and long-
term objectives and their indicators identified in the project’s logframe, the in-
formational requirements and expectations of stakeholders, as well as other
practical considerations, such as project/programme budget and time frame.
ÔÔ When appropriate, it is useful to build on existing M&E capacities and practices.
New M&E processes may not only burden the local capacity but they can al-
ienate local stakeholders. If existing M&E practices are accurate, reliable and
timely, this can save time/resources and build ownership to coordinate with
and complement them.
ÔÔ Particular attention should be given to stakeholder interests and expectations
throughout the M&E process (as discussed in Step 1 below, but a key considera-
tion throughout all M&E steps). In addition to local beneficiaries, it is also im-
portant to coordinate and address interests and concerns from other stake-
holders. Often, multiple Red Cross Red Crescent actors may be involved in
delivering programmes either multilaterally, bilaterally or directly.
ÔÔ M&E should be tailored and adjusted to the real-world context throughout the
project/programme’s life cycle. Projects/programmes operate in a dynamic set-
ting, and M&E activities need to adapt accordingly. Objectives may change,
as will the M&E system as it refines its processes and addresses arising prob-
lems and concerns. Like a project/programme itself, the M&E system should
be monitored, periodically reviewed and improved upon.
ÔÔ Only monitor and evaluate what is necessary and sufficient for project/pro-
gramme management and accountability. It takes time and resources to col-
lect, manage and analyse data for reporting. Extra information is more often
a burden than a luxury. It can distract attention away from the more relevant
and useful information. It can also overload and strain a project/programme’s
capacity and ability to deliver the very services it is seeking to measure!

27
2.1 Step 1 – Identify the purpose
and scope of the M&E system
What you will find in Step 1:
2.1.1 Review the project/programme’s operational design (logframe)
2.1.2 Identify key stakeholder informational needs and expectations
2.1.3 Identify any M&E requirements
2.1.4 Scope of major M&E events and functions
The purpose and scope of the M&E system answers, “Why do we need M&E
and how comprehensive should it be?” It serves as a reference point for the M&E
system, guiding key decisions such as informational needs, methodological ap-
proaches, capacity building and allocation of resources. The following outlines
some key considerations when determining an M&E system’s purpose and scope.
2.1.1 Review the project/programme’s operational design
(logframe)
For IFRC’s projects/programmes, the logframe is the foundation on which the M&E
system is built. The logframe is a summary of the project/programme’s operational
design, based on the situation and problem analysis conducted during the project/
programme’s design stage. It summarizes the logical sequence of objectives to
achieve the project/programme’s intended results (activities, outputs, outcomes
and goal), the indicators and means of verification to measure these objectives, and
any key assumptions. For IFRC’s projects, the project/programme design is typi-
cally summarized in a standard logframe table (see Annex 5).14
A well-developed logframe reflects the informational needs of the project/pro-
gramme. For example, the objectives and informational needs of a project/pro-
gramme during an emergency operation will have very different logframe and related
M&E requirements than a longer-term development project/programme (see Box 5).
BOX 5: M&E in emergency settings
Much of the IFRC’s work is assisting people in need in emergency settings.
Planning M&E for an emergency operation presents operational objectives
and contexts that typically differ from longer-term development projects/pro-
grammes. Emergency settings are often dangerous and dynamic, with rapidly
changing, complex situations. Therefore, acute and immediate needs often take
priority over longer-term objectives in a project/programme’s operational de-
sign. Also, high media coverage and pressure from donors demand timely M&E
evidence for results. Other key challenges include increased insecurity and un-
certainty for both affected populations and field workers, damaged or absent in-
frastructure, restricted access to areas and populations, absence of baseline data,
and rapid changes in personnel. In such settings, it may not be possible to imple-
ment complex M&E systems. Instead, it is best to plan for simple and efficient
systems, stressing regular and timely monitoring and rapid evaluations, such as
real-time evaluations (RTEs – see Table 2, Section 1.4). Timely information is es-
sential to determine priorities and inform decision-making, identifying emerging
problems as well as developing trends to guide intervention revision that best
meets emergency needs. The IFRC plan of action for disaster response opera-
tions (see Annex 2, M&E Resources) provides templates and guidance for col-
lecting and summarizing key information during an IFRC response to a disaster.
14 In addition to the example
logframe format presented
in Annex 5, these logframe
components are defined in
more detail in the IFRC’s
Project/Programme
Planning Guidance Manual
(IFRC PPP 2010).

28
When reviewing the logframe, it is important to check it for logic and relevance.
Often, in the rush to start a project/programme, there may be oversights in the
development of a logframe. Sometimes it is prepared in an office or by people
far removed from the project/programme setting. The logframe is not a static
“blueprint”, but should be reassessed and revised according to the realities and
changing circumstances in the field. This is particularly true in humanitarian re-
sponses, where populations and needs can rapidly change in a short time frame.
However, changes should only be made after careful consideration and consulta-
tion with key stakeholders and in compliance with any donor requirements.
An important consideration in the logframe is the use of industry-recognized,
standard indicators – see Box 6 below. These can make a big difference in the
subsequent M&E. Standard indicators may not only save time in designing in-
dicators but an important advantage is that they typically come with accepted,
standard definitions to ensure they are measured reliably and consistently,
and measurement methods are usually well developed and tested. Another key
advantage is that standard indicators can be compared over time, place and
projects/programmes. Finally, industry-recognized indicators contribute to
credibility and legitimacy across stakeholders.
However, there are limitations to how much indicators can be standardized, and
they can be inflexible and unrepresentative of the local context. Also, consider-
ation should be given to the project/programme’s capacity (financial or human)
to measure certain standard indicators according to international methods and
best practices. Nevertheless, industry-recognized, standard indicators can be
very useful, and often it is best to use a combination of standardized indicators and
those designed specifically for the local context.
BOX 6: Types of industry (standard) indicators
Industry-recognized, standard indicators vary from sector or project/pro-
gramme area. The following is a summary of key types of industry-recog-
nized indicators:
ÎÎ Industry indicators developed for use across the humanitarian in-
dustry. Examples include the Sphere Project and the Humanitarian
Accountability Partnership. (While many industry codes and standards
exist, they do not all necessarily include standard indicators, but may be
left to interpretation by individual organizations.)
ÎÎ Sector-specific or thematic indicators developed for use in specific the-
matic sectors. Examples include the sectors covered by the Sphere Project,
progress indicators for the United Nations Millennium Development Goals
and thematic groupings such as the IFRC HIV Global Alliance indicators.
ÎÎ Cluster indicators developed by some of the UN Clusters to assess
achievements of the overall focus area of the cluster. These are particu-
larly useful where outcomes and impact achieved cannot be attributed
to the work of one organization, but rather to the collective efforts of
multiple organizations in a cluster or across clusters.
ÎÎ Organization-specific indicators which have been developed for use in
specific operations or for organizational reporting against its strategy.
The seven key proxy indicators detailed for the Federation-Wide
Reporting System (FWRS)15
are an example of this, as are the ICRC’s
standard indicators on beneficiary counting.
15 Refer to the IFRC’s FWRS
Indicator Guidelines, listed in

29
2.1.2 Identify key stakeholder informational needs and
expectations
Planning an M&E system based on stakeholder needs and expectations helps to
ensure understanding, ownership and use of M&E information. It is essential to
have a clear understanding of the priorities and information needs of people
interested in or affected by the project/programme. This includes stakeholder
motivations, experience and commitment, as well as the political and other
constraints under which various stakeholders operate. It is especially important
that local knowledge is sought when planning M&E functions to ensure that
they are relevant to and feasible in the local context, and that M&E information
is credible, accepted and more likely to be supported.
Typically, the IFRC’s projects/programmes involve multiple stakeholders at
different levels. Box 7 summarizes some key stakeholders and some of their
common informational needs.
BOX 7: Examples of the IFRC’s key stakeholders and informational needs
ÎÎ Communities (beneficiaries) provided with information are able to
better understand, participate in and own a project/programme.
ÎÎ Donors, which include those within the IFRC (e.g. donor National Societies
and the secretariat) and individuals and agencies outside the IFRC, typi-
cally require information to ensure compliance and accountability.
ÎÎ Project/programme management use information for decision-making,
strategic planning, and accountability.
ÎÎ Project/programme staff can use information for project/programme
implementation and to understand management decisions.
ÎÎ The IFRC’s secretariat and National Societies may require informa-
tion for donor accountability, long-term strategic planning, knowledge
sharing, organizational learning and advocacy.
ÎÎ Partners (bilateral or local) can use information for coordination and
collaboration, as well as for knowledge and resource sharing. The ICRC is
an important multilateral actor with which the IFRC often works closely.
ÎÎ Government and local authorities may require information to ensure
that legal and regulatory requirements are met, and it can help build
political understanding and support.
Typically, a stakeholder assessment is conducted during the planning stage of
a project/programme.16
This initial assessment can inform M&E planning, but
for planning the M&E system it is recommended to focus more specifically on
the informational needs and expectations of the key stakeholders.
An M&E stakeholder assessment table is provided in Annex 6. It is a useful
tool to refer to throughout the project/programme cycle, summarizing: who
are the key stakeholders, what information they require, why, when, how (in
what format) and any role or function they expect or are required to have in the
M&E system.
16 Refer to IFRC PPP, 2010: p. 16.
Practical tip
Sometimes there is a
combination of M&E
requirements from
multiple donors and
partners. It is best early
in the project/pro-
gramme design stage
to coordinate these
expectations and re-
quirements as much
as possible to reduce
the burden on project/
programme implemen-
tation. Agreement on
common indicators,
methods, tools and for-
mats not only reduces
the M&E overload, but
it can conserve human
and financial resources.

30
2.1.3 Identify any M&E requirements
Important informational needs worth specific attention are those that arise from any
donor guidelines and requirements, governmental laws and regulations, and inter-
nationally-agreed-upon standards. These requirements can include very detailed
procedures, formats and resources, and are often non-negotiable. Therefore, it is
best to identify and plan for them early in the M&E planning process.
Internationally-agreed-upon standards and criteria are particularly relevant
to the IFRC’s work. IFRC interventions are often implemented through various
partnerships within the Movement, with bilateral donors and between interna-
tional, national and civil society organizations. It is important that we conduct
our work according to agreed-upon standards and criteria – which need to be
monitored and evaluated.
The most important of these standards are those of the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement. These include the Fundamental Principles of the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, the Code of Conduct for the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief,
and the IFRC Strategy 2020 (see inside front cover). The IFRC’s management policy for
evaluations identifies evaluation standards and criteria (discussed in Box 3, Section
1.4), and Box 8 (below) notes specific requirements for the IFRC’s secretariat-funded
projects/programmes. Other key principles include the internationally recognized
DAC Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance, which identify key focus areas
for evaluating international work, and the Sphere Standards, which identify a set of
universal minimum standards in core areas of humanitarian response.17
BOX 8: Specific evaluation requirements for the IFRC’s secretariat-
funded projects/programmes.
The IFRC’s management policy for evaluations identifies specific require-
ments for secretariat-funded projects/programmes:18
• Baseline studies prior to project/programme implementation.
• Final evaluations, or some form of final assessment, after project/pro-
gramme completion.
• Independent final evaluations for projects/programmes exceeding
1,000,000 Swiss francs.
• Midterm evaluations or reviews for projects/programmes lasting more than
24 months.
• Real-time evaluations for emergency operations initiated within the first
three months of an emergency operation under one or a combination
of the following conditions: the emergency operation will run for more
than nine months; more than 100,000 people are planned to be reached
by the emergency operation; the emergency appeal seeks more than
10,000,000 Swiss francs; more than ten National Societies are operational
with staff in the field.
2.1.4 Scope of major M&E events and functions
The scope of the M&E system refers to its scale and complexity. It can be highly com-
plex with a variety of activities and requiring considerable expertise and resources,
or it can be relatively simple, relying on internal resources and capacities.
17 The DAC criteria were compiled
by the Development Assistance
Committee of the Organization
for Economic Co-operation
and Development; The Sphere
Standards were developed
by a group of NGOs and the
International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement.
18 More detail about these and
other evaluation practices
for the IFRC’s secretariat
can be found in the IFRC’s
management policy for
evaluations (see Annex 2,
M&E Resources).

31
Each of the topics discussed above plays a key role in determining the scope of
the M&E system. For example, the complexity of a project/programme’s design
(e.g. how many and the type of outcomes it seeks to achieve) can have a signifi-
cant impact on the scale and complexity of the M&E system. Likewise, donor
requirements can largely determine the precision and methodological rigour
needed in the M&E system. Some other important considerations for the scope
(size) of the M&E system include:
• The geographic scale of the project/programme area, including accessibility to
programme areas
• The demographic scale of the project/programme, including specific target
populations and their accessibility
• The time frame or duration of the project/programme, including any pre- and
post-project M&E needs
• The available human resources and budget (discussed in Sections 2.5 and 2.6).
Scoping the M&E system helps to identify major M&E activities and events – the
overall scope (size) of the M&E system. While specific M&E functions should be
addressed in more detail later in the planning process, an initial inventory of
key activities at this stage provides an important overview or “map” to build
upon for planning for funding, technical expertise, capacity building, etc.
An M&E activity planning table is provided in Annex 7. Such a table can be useful to
scope major M&E activities, their timing/frequency, responsibilities and budgets.
It is also useful to refer to Diagram 1 (see Section 1.2) for an overview of key
M&E activities during the project/programme cycle. Box 9 (below) provides some
examples of key M&E activities planned for three different types of projects ac-
cording to intervention type and time frame.
Box 9: Examples of key M&E activities*
Emergency relief
project
One-year recovery
project
Four-year development
project
ÎÎ Baseline study
(from FACT before
implementation)
ÎÎ Project (results,
activity, financial)
monitoring
ÎÎ Context
monitoring
ÎÎ Beneficiary
monitoring
ÎÎ Real-time evalua-
tion (month 4)
ÎÎ Regular opera-
tions updates
ÎÎ Final evaluation
ÎÎ Baseline study
from initial
assessment
ÎÎ Project
monitoring
ÎÎ Context
monitoring
ÎÎ Beneficiary
monitoring
ÎÎ Six-month
project review
ÎÎ Regular opera-
tions updates
ÎÎ Final evaluation
ÎÎ Baseline survey
ÎÎ Project monitoring
ÎÎ Context monitoring
ÎÎ Beneficiary monitoring
ÎÎ Mid-year report, pro-
gramme update,
annual report
ÎÎ Mid-year and/or annual
reviews
ÎÎ Two-year midterm
evaluation
ÎÎ Independent final
evaluation (with
endline survey)
ÎÎ Ex-post evaluation
* Note that these are only examples and actual activities will depend on specific project/programme context.
Reminder
Do not forget to plan
for a baseline study! All
projects/programmes
should have some form
of measurement of the
initial status of appro-
priate indicators prior to
implementation for later
comparison to help as-
sess trends and impact,
(see Section 1.5).

32
2.2 Step 2 – Plan for data
collection and management
2.2.1 Develop an M&E plan table
2.2.2 Assess the availability of secondary data
2.2.3 Determine the balance of quantitative and qualitative data
2.2.4 Triangulate data collection sources and methods
2.2.5 Determine sampling requirements
2.2.6 Prepare for any surveys
2.2.7 Prepare specific data collection methods/tools
2.2.8 Establish stakeholder complaints and feedback mechanisms
2.2.9 Establish project/programme staff/volunteer review mechanisms
2.2.10 Plan for data management
2.2.11 Use an indicator tracking table (ITT)
2.2.12 Use a risk log (table)
Once you have defined the project/programme’s informational needs, the next step is
to plan for the reliable collection and management of the data so it can be efficiently
analysed and used as information. Both data collection and management are
firmly linked as data management begins the moment it is collected.
2.2.1 Develop an M&E plan table
An M&E plan is a table that builds upon a project/programme’s logframe to detail
key M&E requirements for each indicator and assumption. It summarizes key in-
dicator (measurement) information in a single table: a detailed definition of the
data, its sources, the methods and timing of its collection, the people respon-
sible and the intended audience and use of the data. Box 10 (next page) summa-
rizes the benefits of using an M&E plan.
Annex 8 provides the M&E plan table template adopted by the IFRC, with specific in-
structions and examples. The M&E plan can be formatted differently, according to
the planning requirements for project/programme management. For instance,
additional columns can be added, such as a budget column, a separate column
to focus on data sources, or two columns to distinguish people responsible for
data collection versus data analysis. Often the project/programme donor will
require a specific M&E plan format.
The M&E plan should be completed during the planning stage of a project/pro-
gramme (before implementation). This allows the project/programme team to
cross-check the logframe and ensure that the indicators and scope of work they
represent in both project/programme implementation and data collection, anal-
ysis and reporting are realistic to field realities and team capacities.
It is best that the M&E plan is developed by those who will be using it. Completing
the table requires detailed knowledge of the project/programme and context
provided by the local project/programme team and partners. Their involvement
also contributes to data quality because it reinforces their understanding of
what data they are to collect and how it will be collected.
Note
Data is a term given
to raw facts or figures
before they have been
processed and ana-
lysed. Information refers
to data that has been
processed and analysed
for reporting and use.
Note
M&E plans are some-
times called different
names by various users,
such as an “indicator
planning matrix” and a
“data collection plan”.
While the names (and
formats) may vary, the
overall function re-
mains the same – to
detail the M&E require-
ments for each indi-
cator and assumption.

33
BOX 10: Is an M&E plan worth all the time and effort?
M&E plans are becoming standard practice – and with good reason. The
IFRC’s experience with projects and programmes responding to the 2004
tsunami in South Asia found that the time and effort spent in developing
M&E plans had multiple benefits. They not only made data collection and
reporting more efficient and reliable but also helped project/programme
managers plan and implement their projects/programmes through care-
fully consideration of what was being implemented and measured. M&E
plans also served as critical cross-checks of the logframes, ensuring that
they were realistic to field realities. Another benefit was that they helped
to transfer critical knowledge to new staff and senior management, which
was particularly important with projects/programmes lasting longer than
two years. A final point to remember is that it can be much more timely and
costly to address poor-quality data than to plan for its reliable collection and use.
2.2.2 Assess the availability of secondary data
An important consideration for data sources is the availability of reliable sec-
ondary data. Secondary data refers to data that is not directly collected by and for
the project/programme, but which can nevertheless meet project/programme infor-
mational needs. (In contrast, primary data is collected directly by the project/
programme team.)
Examples of secondary data include:
• A vulnerability capacity assessment (VCA) conducted by a partner Red Cross
Red Crescent programme working in the project/programme area
• Demographic statistics from the government census bureau, central statis-
tics bureau, Ministry of Health, etc.
• Maps and aerial photographs of degraded land from the Ministry of Soil Con-
servation
• Information on health, food security and nutritional level from UNICEF and
the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Food
Programme
• School attendance and performance records available from the Ministry of
Education.

34
Secondary data is important to consider because it can save considerable time
and expense. It can also be used to help triangulate (see below) data sources and
verify (prove) primary data and analysis collected directly as part of the project/
programme.
However, it is critical to ensure that secondary data is relevant and reliable. As
secondary data is not designed specifically for project/programme needs, it is
important to avoid the trap of using irrelevant secondary data just because it is
available. Check the relevance of secondary data for:
ÔÔ Population – does it cover the population about which you need data?
ÔÔ Time period – does it cover the same time period during which you need data?
ÔÔ Data variables – are the characteristics measured relevant for what you are
researching? For example, just because the data may be on road safety, if
your project/programme focuses on the use of motorcycle helmets, a road
safety study on deaths due to drunken driving may not be relevant (unless
they separate deaths for those cases in which it involved a motorcyclist with
or without a helmet).
Even if the data measures what you need, it is important to ensure that the
source is credible and reliable. As Section 1.9 discusses, it is important to check
that any data source (primary or secondary) is accurate (measures what it is
intended to measure) and precise (the data measurement can be repeated ac-
curately and consistently over time and by different people.) Two key considera-
tions for secondary data include:
ÔÔ Reputation – how credible and respected are the people (organization) that
commissioned the data and the authors who conducted the research and
reported the data? Identify why the secondary data was initially collected
and whether there may have been any motive or reason (e.g. political or eco-
nomic) that it could bias the data. It can be helpful to check with other or-
ganizations and stakeholders to assess this. If possible, it can also help to
check the credentials of the researchers/authors of the data and report – e.g.
their educational background, related reports and systematic assessments,
whether they are accredited or belong to industry associations, etc.
ÔÔ Rigour – were the methods used to collect, analyse and report on the data
technically accurate? Check that there is a description of the research meth-
ods that provides sufficient information about the data collection, manage-
ment and quality control, analysis, and interpretation so that its worth or
merit can be determined. (If you do not feel capable to do this, then seek out
the expertise of someone competent in research methods to assist you.)

35
2.2.3 Determine the balance of quantitative and qualitative
data
When planning for data collection, it is important to plan for the extent quantitative
and qualitative data will be used. Box 11 defines and compares both types of data.
Box 11: Comparing quantitative versus qualitative data
Quantitative data Qualitative data
Quantitative data measures and
explains what is being studied
with numbers (e.g. counts, ratios,
percentages, proportions, average
scores, etc). Quantitative methods
tend to use structured approaches
(e.g. coded responses to surveys)
which provide precise data that can
be statistically analysed and repli-
cated (copied) for comparison.
Examples
• 64 communities are served by an
early warning system.
• 40 per cent of the households
spend more than two hours gath-
ering water for household needs.
Qualitative data explains what is
being studied with words (docu-
mented observations, representa-
tive case descriptions, perceptions,
opinions of value, etc). Qualitative
methods use semi-structured
techniques (e.g. observations and
interviews) to provide in-depth un-
derstanding of attitudes, beliefs,
motives and behaviours. They tend
to be more participatory and reflec-
tive in practice.
Examples
• According to community focus
groups, the early warning system
sounded during the emergency
simulation, but in some instances
it was not loud enough.
• During community meetings,
women explained that they spend
a considerable amount of their day
collecting drinking water, and so
have limited water available for
personal and household hygiene.
Quantitative data is often considered more objective and less biased than qualitative
data – especially with donors and policy-makers. Because qualitative data is not
an exact measurement of what is being studied, generalizations or compari-
sons are limited, as is the credibility of observations and judgements. However,
quantitative methods can be very costly, and may exclude explanations and
human voices about why something has occurred and how people feel about it.
Recent debates have concluded that both quantitative and qualitative methods
have subjective (biased) and objective (unbiased) characteristics. Therefore,
a mixed-methods approach is often recommended that can utilize the advantages
of both, measuring what happened with quantitative data and examining how
and why it happened with qualitative data. When used together, qualitative
methods can uncover issues during the early stages of a project/programme
that can then be further explored using quantitative methods, or quantitative
methods can highlight particular issues to be examined in-depth with qualita-
tive methods. For example, interviews (a qualitative method) may reveal that
people in a community are concerned about hunger, and a sample of infants’
weights (a quantitative method) may substantiate that mass-wasting and mal-
nutrition are indeed prevalent in the community.

36
2.2.4 Triangulate data collection sources and methods
Triangulation is the process of using different sources and/or methods for data
collection.19
Combining different sources and methods (mixed methods) helps
to cross-check data and reduce bias to better ensure the data is valid, reliable
and complete. The process also lends to credibility if any of the resulting infor-
mation is questioned. Triangulation can include a combination of primary and
secondary sources, quantitative and qualitative methods, or participatory and
non-participatory techniques, as follows:
ÔÔ Example of triangulating data sources: When determining community per-
ception of a cash-for-work project, do not just include participants selected
for the project, but also some who did not take part as they may have a differ-
ent perspective (e.g. on the selection process for participating in the project).
Also, include the views of the project staff, partners and other local groups
working in the project/programme area.
ÔÔ Example of triangulating data collection methods: A household survey is
conducted to determine beneficiary perception of a cash-for-work project,
and it is complemented by focus group discussion and key informant inter-
views with cash-for-work participants as well as other community members.
2.2.5 Determine sampling requirements
A sample is a subset of a whole population selected to study and draw conclusions
about the population as a whole. Sampling (the process of selecting a sample)
is a critical aspect of planning the collection of primary data. Most projects/
programmes do not have sufficient resources to measure a whole population (a
census), nor is it usually necessary. Sampling is used to save time and money by
collecting data from a subgroup to make generalizations about the larger population.
19 Triangulation does not literally
have to be three sources
or methods, but the idea is
to rely on more than one or
two sources/methods.
Note
Many people do not
realize they are sam-
pling when they are;
unless you measure all
members of a popula-
tion, you are sampling
and it should be care-
fully planned – whether
quantitative or qualita-
tive.

37
The process of sampling includes the following steps:
1. Define the specific issues that you will be measuring – this will inform what
methodology will be used to address the selected issues. For example, in de-
termining a survey on sanitation knowledge, attitude and practice/behaviour
could be used to assess the extent to which behaviour has been changed by
activities that raise awareness of sanitation.
2. Determine the appropriate sampling method – unless primary data collection
includes the total population studied, one of two broad types of samples will
be used, depending on the degree of accuracy and precision required:
• Random (probability) samples are quantitatively determined and use sta-
tistics to make more precise generalizations about the larger population.
• Purposeful (non-random) samples are qualitatively determined, often based
on convenience or some other factor; they typically involve smaller, target-
ed samples of the population, but because they do not use statistics they
are less reliable for generalizations about the larger population.
Random samples are more complex, laborious and costly than purposeful
samples, and are not necessary for qualitative methods such as focus group
discussions. However, random samples are often expected in larger projects/
programmes because they are more precise and can minimize bias – donors
frequently require random sampling when using baseline and endline sur-
veys. As discussed above, a mixed-methods approach may be best, combining
both sample methods for quantitative and qualitative data collection.
In addition to these two broad types of sampling methods, there is a variety
of specific sampling designs, such as simple random sampling, stratified
random sampling, cluster sampling, multi-stage sampling, convenience sam-
pling, purposeful sampling, and respondent-driven sampling. While we are
unable to go into detail about the different sampling designs now, it is impor-
tant to understand that the design choice impacts the overall sample size. In sum-
mary, certain sample designs are selected over others because they provide a
sample size and composition that is best suited for what is being studied.
3. Define the sample frame – a list of every member of the population from which
a sample is to be taken (e.g. the communities or categories of people – wom-
en, children, refugees, etc).
4. Determine the sample size – the sample size is calculated using equations spe-
cific to the type of survey (whether descriptive/one-off or comparative/base-
line-endline surveys – both discussed below) and to the indicator type used as
a basis for the calculation (whether a mean/integer or proportion/percentage).
There are several key design variables for each of these equations that need
to be determined, each of which affects sample size. While there are no
“right” values for these design variables, there are accepted standards and
“rules of thumb”. For example, for descriptive/one-off surveys, the key de-
sign variables include significance (also known as confidence level) and the
margin of sampling error.20
The accepted standard varies between 90 and
95 per cent for the confidence level and between 5 and 10 per cent for the
margin of sampling error.
While calculating sample sizes is a scientific exercise (understanding which
equations to use and what values to assign the key design variables), shaping
the sample size to “fit” a given project/programme contains a fair amount of
art, as manipulating the values of the key design variables involves trade-
offs that affect both survey implementation and analysis. It is strongly
recommended that an experienced sampling technician is consulted.
20 The margin of error is where
your results have an error of
no more than X per cent, while
the confidence level is the
percentage confidence in the
reliability of the estimate to
produce similar results over
time. These two determine
how accurate your sample
and survey results are - e.g. to
achieve 95 per cent confidence
with an error of 5 per cent, if
the same survey were done
100 times, results would be
within +/- 5 per cent the same
as the first time, 95 times out of
100. There is a variety of simple
sample size calculators on the
internet – see Annex 2, M&E
Resources, for some links.
21 Some key resources for the
use of statistics in project/
programme M&E, including
online sample calculators,
can be found in Annex 2, M&E
Resources.
Sounds complicated?
The use of random
sampling and statistics
can be confusing, and
it is often best to seek
out the expertise of
someone competent in
statistics.21

38
2.2.6 Prepare for any surveys
Surveys are a common method of gathering data for project/programme M&E.
Surveys can be classified in a number of ways, such as according to the specific
method used – e.g. in person, by mail, telephone, etc. They generally use inter-
view techniques (questions or statements that people respond to), measurement
techniques (e.g. infant’s weight to determine nutritional status), or a combina-
tion of both. Unless a complete population is to be surveyed, some form of sam-
pling (discussed above) is used with surveys.
One important distinction for surveys can be made by the manner in which the
survey questions are asked:
• Semi-structured surveys use open-ended questions that are not limited to de-
fined answers but allow respondents to answer and express opinions at length
– e.g. “How useful is the first-aid kit to your family?” Semi-structured surveys
allow more flexibility in response, but take more skill and cost in administer-
ing – interviewers must be experienced in probing and extracting information.
• Structured surveys use a standardized approach to asking fixed (closed-ended)
questions that limit respondents’ answers to a predefined set of answers,
such as yes/no, true/false, or multiple choice – e.g. “Did you receive the first-
aid kit?” While pre-coded questions can be efficient in time and useful for
statistical analysis, they must be carefully designed to ensure that questions
are understood by all respondents and are not misleading. Designing a ques-
tionnaire may seem commonsense, but it involves a subtlety that requires
experience. See Annex 9 for examples of closed-ended questions used in
structured surveys.
Another important distinction for surveys can be made based on the timing and
function of the survey:
• A descriptive survey seeks to obtain representative data about a population at
a single point of time, without making comparisons between groups (such as
a one-off needs assessment).
• A comparative survey seeks to compare the results between groups – either
the same population at two points in time (e.g. baseline-endline design), or
two distinct groups at the same point in time (e.g. treatment control groups).
Whatever survey method is used, it is critical to understand how it affects the way
in which sample sizes are calculated. For example, descriptive surveys need to ac-
count for a margin of error when calculating the sample size, while comparative
surveys require a power calculation to determine the best sample size.
It is beyond the scope of this guide to adequately cover the topic of surveys,
and interested readers are encouraged to refer to other resources.22
In addition
to survey design, implementation and analysis, it is useful to also have an un-
derstanding of sampling (discussed above) and statistical analysis (see Data
analysis, Section 2.3). In short, it may be advisable to seek expert advice/assis-
tance if a survey is to be used.
2.2.7 Prepare specific data collection methods/tools
The M&E plan summarizes data collection methods and tools, but these still
need to be prepared and ready for use. Sometimes methods/tools will need
to be newly developed but, more often, they can be adapted from elsewhere.
Annex 10 provides a summary of key data collection methods and tools.
The best practices for preparing data collection methods/tools will ultimately
depend on the specific method/tool. However, there are some important overall
22 Some key resources are
listed in Annex 2, M&E
Resources, but there are
a large number of other
resources available online.

39
recommendations. Box 12 (on page 40) highlights ways to minimize data collec-
tion costs. Some additional practical considerations in planning for data collec-
tion include:
ÔÔ Prepare data collection guidelines. This helps to ensure standardization, con-
sistency and reliability over time and among different people in the data col-
lection process. Double-check that all the data required for indicators is being
captured through at least one data source.
ÔÔ Pre-test data collection tools. This helps to detect problematic questions or
techniques, verify collection time, identify potential ethical issues and build
the competence of data collectors.
ÔÔ Translate and back-translate data collection tools. This ensures that the tools
are linguistically accurate, culturally compatible and operate smoothly.
ÔÔ Train data collectors. This includes an overview of the data collection system,
data collection techniques, tools, ethics, culturally appropriate interpersonal
communication skills and practical experience in collecting data.
ÔÔ Address ethical concerns. Identify and respond to any concerns expressed by
the target population. Ensure that the necessary permission or authoriza-
tion has been obtained from local authorities, that local customs and attire
(clothing) are respected, and that confidentiality and voluntary participation
are maintained.

40
BOX 12: Minimizing data collection costs
Data collection is typically one of the most expensive aspects of the M&E
system. One of the best ways to lessen data collection costs is to reduce the
amount of data collected (Bamberger et al. 2006). The following questions
can help simplify data collection and reduce costs:
ÎÎ Is the information necessary and sufficient? Collect only what is neces-
sary for project/programme management and evaluation. Limit infor-
mation needs to the stated objectives, indicators and assumptions in the
logframe.
ÎÎ Are there reliable secondary sources of data? As discussed above, sec-
ondary data can save considerable time and costs – as long as it is reliable.
ÎÎ Is the sample size adequate but not excessive? Determine the sample
size that is necessary to estimate or detect change. Consider using strati-
fied and cluster samples.
ÎÎ Can the data collection instruments be simplified? Eliminate unneces-
sary questions from questionnaires and checklists. In addition to saving
time and cost, this has the added benefit of reducing survey fatigue
among respondents.
ÎÎ Is it possible to use competent local people for the collection of survey
data? This can include university students, health workers, teachers,
government officials and community workers. There may be associated
training costs, but considerable savings can be made by hiring a team
of external data collectors, and there is the advantage that local helpers
will be familiar with the population, language, etc.
ÎÎ Are there alternative, cost-saving methods? Sometimes targeted quali-
tative approaches (e.g. participatory rapid appraisal – PRA) can reduce
the costs of the data collection, data management and statistical anal-
ysis required by a survey – when such statistical accuracy is not neces-
sary. Self-administered questionnaires can also reduce costs.
2.2.8 Establish stakeholder complaints and feedback
mechanisms
A complaints and feedback mechanism provides a means for stakeholders to pro-
vide comment and voice complaints about the IFRC’s work. It is a particularly im-
portant data collection topic worth special mention. Complaints and feedback
mechanisms provide valuable insights and data for the ongoing monitoring and
periodical evaluation of a project/programme. They can help to anticipate and
address potential problems, increase accountability and credibility, and rein-
force morale and ownership.
It is important to recognize that stakeholder complaints and feedback can be in-
ternal or external – (from those involved in project/programme management
and implementation versus those affected by project implementation). Most
importantly, beneficiaries (the target population) should have the opportunity
to express their perceptions and file any grievances about the services they
receive. However, it is also important for other stakeholders, such as project/
programme staff, volunteers and partners, to have the opportunity to file com-
plaints and provide feedback.

41
It is also important to understand that stakeholder feedback can be positive or
negative. It can be just as useful and empowering for stakeholders to express
positive feedback, lessons learned, and reflections, as it is grievances. However,
at a minimum, projects/programmes should have a formal complaints mecha-
nism for stakeholders to legally file grievances.
A complaints mechanism is an established set of procedures for stakeholders to
safely voice grievances or concerns that are addressed objectively against a standard
set of rules and principles. It models accountability and commitment to the
IFRC’s stakeholders – especially our moral and legal responsibility to respond
to any wrongdoing or misconduct, e.g. issues of sexual exploitation, abuse of
power, and corruption.
There is no one approach (method) for stakeholder complaints and feedback
– approaches should be adapted to specific stakeholders. Communicating and
dealing with complaints and feedback differ across community and organiza-
tional cultures. Complaints and feedback can be written or oral, function di-
rectly or through intermediaries (third parties), individually or through groups,
personally or anonymously. Specific examples range from a comment box and
posted mail feedback to community meetings and online (feedback) forums.
Annex 11 provides an example of a complaints form to record and respond to
specific complaints, and Annex 12 provides an example of a complaints log to
track multiple complaints. Stakeholder complaints and feedback can also be
tracked in a regular project/programme management report – discussed in
Section 2.4 and as illustrated in Annex 19.
It is beyond the scope (and space) of this guide to adequately cover this important
topic and we encourage you to refer to the IFRC Guide for Stakeholder Complaints
and Feedback – see Box 13 on next page.

42
BOX 13: The IFRC’s guide for stakeholder feedback
The IFRC Guide for Stakeholder Complaints and Feedback provides guidance
on how we solicit, process and respond to feedback from our stakeholders. It
identifies six main steps for establishing a stakeholder complaints and feed-
back mechanism:
1. Agree on the purpose of the complaints and feedback mechanism – this
helps to build understanding and ownership among those who will use it.
2. Agree on what constitutes valid feedback, especially a complaint – this
helps to give stakeholders a sense of where and what kind of action is
likely to be required in future.
3. Agree on the stakeholders targeted by the complaints and feedback
mechanism – this helps to tailor that mechanism to its audience.
4. Agree on the most appropriate channel for communicating complaints
and feedback – this checks that the mechanism is culturally compatible
and appropriate, so it is more likely to get used if needed.
5. Agree on a standard process to handle complaints and feedback – in ad-
dition to stakeholders providing complaints and feedback, it is important
that those expected to review and respond also understand and uphold
the process.
6. Sensitize stakeholders about the complaints and feedback mechanism
– this is a critical step because how the mechanism is presented to in-
tended users will largely shape how receptive and likely they are to use it.
2.2.9 Establish project/programme staff/volunteers review
mechanisms
While monitoring and assessing the project/programme context and implementa-
tion is critical, project/programme staff and volunteer performance information is an
important source of data for ongoing project/programme monitoring and management.
Staff/volunteer time management and performance reviews are typically part of
the human resources department of the implementing organization (e.g. National
Society). As such, it is important to ensure that any project/programme-specific
monitoring systems are organizationally consistent and in accordance with
human resources processes and procedures. Therefore, we limit the following
discussion to a few key considerations:
ÔÔ Individual staff and volunteers’ objectives should be based on the relevant objec-
tives from the project/programme’s logframe, reflecting a clear link between the
objectives of an individual and those of the project/programme.
ÔÔ Utilize regular tools and forums to track and review time management and per-
formance. Annex 13 provides an example of a template for staff/volunteer
performance management. Such tools should be used in combination with
periodic performance reviews, which can be on a one-to-one basis with the
project/programme manager or involve input from multiple sources, includ-
ing subordinates, peers, supervisors and community members (clients) them-
selves.
ÔÔ A useful tool for monitoring and managing individual staff/volunteer time is
a time sheet of their key activities and/or deliverables. Annex 14 provides an
example of an individual time resourcing sheet that can be used to plan and

43
monitor the time required for each individual to engage in different activities.
Against this, each individual can then record how much time they actually
spent on each activity. As such, this tool helps with planning an individual’s
time as well as subsequent monitoring, and, when actual time is very differ-
ent to that planned, plans should be revised accordingly.
ÔÔ A useful tool for monitoring and managing human resources is a project/pro-
gramme team time sheet of key activities and/or deliverables. Annex 15 pro-
vides an example of project/programme team time resourcing sheet. This
provides an overview of the full team, highlighting which people should be
engaged in which activities, when, and how much of their time is required.
2.2.10 Plan for data management
Data management refers to the processes and systems for how a project/programme
will systematically and reliably store, manage and access M&E data. It is a critical
part of the M&E system, linking data collection with its analysis and use. Poorly
managed data wastes time, money and resources; lost or incorrectly recorded data
affects not only the quality and reliability of the data but also all the time and
resources invested in its analysis and use.
Data management should be timely and secure, and in a format that is practical
and user-friendly. It should be designed according to the project/programme
needs, size and complexity. Typically, project/programme data management
is part of an organization’s or project/programme’s larger data management
system and should adhere to any established policies and requirements.
The following are seven key considerations for planning a project/programme’s data
management system: 23
1. Data format. The format in which data is recorded, stored and eventually
reported is an important aspect of overall data management. Standardized
formats and templates (as provided in this guide) improve the organization
and storage of data. Generated data comes in many forms, but are primarily:
a. Numerical (e.g. spreadsheets, database sets)
b. Descriptive (narrative reports, checklists, forms)
c. Visual (e.g. pictures, video, graphs, maps, diagrams)
d. Audio (recordings of interviews, etc).
Data formats can be physical, such as written forms stored in an office filing
cabinet, or electronic, such as a spreadsheet stored in a computer database
(discussed below). Sometimes, donors or key partners, such as govern-
ment ministries, may define how the data should be recorded and stored.
Whatever format, it is important that it is user-friendly, whether its user is a
community member, field staff member or project manager.
23 Adopted from Rodolfo
Siles, 2004, “Project
Management Information
Systems”, which provides
a more comprehensive
discussion on the topic.

44
BOX 14: Formats can reinforce critical analysis and use
How data reporting is formatted can have a considerable influence on how
it is used. For example, an indicator tracking table (see Section 2.2.11 below)
can be designed to record not only the actual indicator performance but
also the planned target for the indicator, as well the percentage of target
achieved. This reinforces critical analysis of variance (the difference be-
tween identified targets and actual results). Similarly, indicator formats can
be disaggregated (separated) by important groups or differences essential
for project/programme implementation and assessment, such as by gender,
age, ethnicity, location, socioeconomic status, etc.
2. Data organization. A project/programme needs to organize its information
into logical, easily understood categories to increase its access and use. Data
organization can depend on a variety of factors and should be tailored to the
users’ needs. Data is typically organized by one or a combination of the fol-
lowing classification logic:
a. Chronologically (e.g. month, quarter, year)
b. By location
c. By content or focus area (e.g. different objectives of a project/
programme)
d. By format (e.g. project reports, donor reports, technical documents).
3. Data availability. Data should be available to its intended users and secure
from unauthorized use (discussed below). Key considerations for data avail-
ability include:
a. Access. How permission is granted and controlled to access data
(e.g. shared computer drives, folders, intranets). This includes the
classification of data for security purposes (e.g. confidential, public,
internal, departmental).
b. Searches. How data can be searched and found (e.g. according to
keywords).
c. Archival. How data is stored and retrieved for future use.
d. Dissemination. How data is shared with others (see Section 2.4.2).
4. Data security and legalities. Projects/programmes need to identify any se-
curity considerations for confidential data, as well as any legal requirements
with governments, donors and other partners. Data should be protected
from non-authorized users. This can range from a lock on a filing cabinet to
computer virus and firewall software programs. Data storage and retrieval
should also conform with any privacy clauses and regulations for auditing
purposes.
5. Information technology (IT). The use of computer technology to systematize
the recording, storage and use of data is especially useful for projects/pro-
grammes with considerable volumes of data, or as part of a larger programme
for which data needs to be collected and analysed from multiple smaller pro-
jects/programmes. Some examples of IT for data management in M&E include:
• Handheld personal digital assistants (PDAs) to record survey findings
• Excel spreadsheets for storing, organizing and analysing data
• Microsoft Access to create user-friendly databases to enter and ana-
lyse data
Control version chaos
When archiving doc-
uments, it is good
practice to save the
document with an iden-
tifying name and date.
For example, rather
than an ambiguous, un-
clear “Final evaluation.
doc”, it is more effective
to title it “IFRC Haiti
WatSan final evaluation
20May2010.doc.” Sure,
it may take a bit more
time to write, but it can
save much time and ef-
fort in the long run.

45
• Sharepoint, a web-based intranet to store, share and discuss M&E data
• An integrated planning management system with an internet plat-
form for inputting, organizing, analysing and sharing information.
IT can help to reorganize and combine data from various sources, highlight-
ing patterns and trends for analysis and to guide decision-making. It is also
very effective for data and information sharing with multiple stakeholders
in different locations. However, the use of IT should be balanced with the
associated costs for the computers and software, resources to maintain and
safeguard the system, and the capacity among intended users.
6. Data quality control. It is important to identify
procedures for checking and cleaning data, and
how to treat missing data. In data management,
unreliable data can result from poor typing of
data, duplication of data entries, inconsistent
data, and accidental deletion and loss of data.
These problems are particularly common with
quantitative data collection for statistical analy-
sis (also discussed in Section 1.9).
Another important aspect of data quality is ver-
sion control.This is how documents can be tracked
for changes over time. Naming a document as
“final” does not help if it gets revised afterwards.
Versions (e.g. 1.0, 1, 2.0, 2.1, etc.) can help, but it is
also recommended to use dates as well.
7. Responsibility and accountability of data man-
agement. It is important to identify the individu-
als or team responsible for developing and/or
maintaining the data management system, as-
sisting team members in its use and enforcing
any policies and regulations. Also, for confiden-
tial data, it is important to identify who author-
izes the release/access of this data.
2.2.11 Use an indicator tracking table (ITT)
An ITT is an important data management tool for recording and monitoring indi-
cator performance to inform project/programme implementation and management.
It differs from an M&E plan because while the M&E plan prepares the project/
programme for data collection on the indicators, the ITT is where the ongoing
measurement of the indicators is recorded. The project/programme manage-
ment report (discussed in Step 4, Section 2.4) then explains the performance of
the indicators reflected in the ITT.
Annex 16 provides the ITT template adopted by IFRC, with specific instruc-
tions and examples.24
Note that the ITT has been formatted on a quarterly re-
porting basis; however, for shorter projects/programmes, it can be reformatted
to a monthly basis.
The ITT has three primary sections:
1. Project/programme background information, such as name, location, dates, etc.
2. Overall project/programme indicators are indicators that may not specifically
be in the project/programme’s logframe but are important to report for strategic
management and as part of the Federation-Wide Reporting System (FWRS).25
24 ITTs can be prepared in
Microsoft Excel or another
spreadsheet program.
25 The Federation-Wide Reporting
System (FWRS) is a mechanism
for monitoring and reporting
on key data from National
Societies and the secretariat
on a regular basis. Data for the
FWRS is based on seven key
proxy indicators, complemented
by ongoing reports prepared
and assessments conducted
by the IFRC. The seven proxy
indicators are: 1) number of
people volunteering time,
2) number of paid staff, 3)
number of people donating
blood, 4) number of local units
(i.e. chapters, branches), 5)
number of people reached,
6) number of total income
received, and 7) number of
total expenditure. Detailed
indicator definitions and
guidance are provided in the
FWRS indicator guidelines. For
further information, see https://
fednet.ifrc.org/sw194270.asp.

46
3. Logframe indicators are aligned with their respective objectives from the log-
frame, and are the greater part of the ITT. Table 5 (below) illustrates a section
(one calendar quarter) of the ITT for logframe indicators.
TABLE 5: Example of indicator tracking table – for one quarter only *
Indicator
Project
baseline
Life of
project
target
Life of
project
to date
% of
annual
target
to date
Annual
project
target
Year to
date
% of
annual
target
to date
Q1 reporting period
Target Actual
%
target
Date Value
1a: Number of
participating
communities
conducting a
vulnerability
and capacity
assessment
(VCA)
quarterly.
May
2011
0 50 5 25% 20 5 25% 10 5 50%
* This is an example section from the indicator tracking table – go to Annex 16 for a more complete template and instructions on using it.
An important function of the ITT is that it helps to determine variance, a key
measure of indicator performance. Variance is the difference between identified
targets and actual results – the percentage of target reached. For instance, in the
example above, ten communities were targeted to conduct a VCA during the
first reporting quarter. However, the actual communities conducting a VCA
were only five. Therefore, the percentage of target, variance, was 50 per cent.
Paying attention to variance encourages critical analysis of and reporting on pro-
ject/programme performance. It also entails setting targets, a good practice in
programme management (see Box 15). Knowing whether your indicator exceeds
or underperforms its target helps to determine if your project/programme is
progressing according to plans, or whether there may need to be adjustments to
the implementation or time frame. Generally, a good rule of thumb is that variance
greater than 10 per cent should be explained in project/programme reports.

47
In our example above, the variance of 50 per cent is well above the 10 per cent
rule and therefore needs an explanation in the project/programme report –
which can prove useful for future programming. For instance, the explanation
may be that low community participation in the VCAs was because they were
planned in these communities at times that coincided with a religious holiday
(e.g. Ramadan), or that the regional monsoon season limited travel to partici-
pate in the VCA exercise. Such information provides valuable lessons for com-
munity participation in the ongoing project/programme or future ones.
BOX 15: The importance of target setting
Target setting is a critical part of M&E planning and responsible project/pro-
gramme management. In order to determine variance (the percentage of
target reached), it is necessary to not only measure the indicator but iden-
tify beforehand a target for that indicator. Project/programme teams may
hesitate to set targets, afraid that they may not accomplish them, or some-
times it is just difficult to predict targets. However, target setting helps to
keep the project/programme’s expected results realistic, to plan resources,
track and report progress (variance) against these targets, and to inform
decision-making and uphold accountability.
Do targets change? Absolutely. Data collected during project/programme
M&E often leads to reassessing and adjusting targets accordingly. Certainly,
such changes should follow any proper procedures and approval.
2.2.12 Use a risk log (table)
While the ITT tracks planned indicator performance, it is also important to track
any risks that threaten project/programme implementation. Such risks can in-
clude those identified and expressed as assumptions in the project/programme
logframe,26
as well as any unexpected risks that may arise.
Annex 17 provides an example of a risk log (table) to record and rate risks, as
well as how they will be handled. Risks can also be tracked in a regular project/
programme management report – discussed in Section 2.4 and illustrated in
Annex 19. When monitoring a risk, in addition to the risk itself, it is important
to identify the date it was first reported, rate its potential impact and likelihood
(e.g. high, medium or low), explain the recommended action to be taken and by
whom, and note when the risk is “closed” (no longer a risk).
26 Remember, an assumption
in a logframe describes a risk
as a positive statement of the
conditions that need to be
met if the project/programme
is to achieve its objectives.

48
2.3 Step 3 – Plan for data analysis
2.3.1 Develop a data analysis plan, identifying the:
A. Purpose of data analysis
B. Frequency of data analysis
C. Responsibility for data analysis
D. Process for data analysis.
2.3.2 Follow the key data analysis stages:
1) Data preparation
2) Data analysis (findings and conclusions)
3) Data validation
4) Data presentation
5) Recommendations and action planning.
Data analysis is the process of converting collected (raw) data into usable informa-
tion. This is a critical step of the M&E planning process because it shapes the
information that is reported and its potential use. It is really a continuous pro-
cess throughout the project/programme cycle to make sense of gathered data
to inform ongoing and future programming. Such analysis can occur when data
is initially collected, and certainly when data is explained in data reporting
(discussed in the next step).
Data analysis involves looking for trends, clusters or other relationships be-
tween different types of data, assessing performance against plans and targets,
forming conclusions, anticipating problems and identifying solutions and best
practices for decision-making and organizational learning. Reliable and timely
analysis is essential for data credibility and utilization.

49
2.3.1 Develop a data analysis plan
There should be a clear plan for data analysis. It should account for the time
frame, methods, relevant tools/templates, people responsible for, and purpose
of the data analysis. A data analysis plan may take the form of a separate, de-
tailed written document, or it can be included as part of the overall project/
programme management and M&E system – for instance, it can be captured in
the M&E plan (see Section 2.2.1). In whatever way it is stated, the following sum-
marizes key considerations when planning for data analysis.
A. Purpose of data analysis
What and how data is analysed is largely determined by the project/programme ob-
jectives and indicators and ultimately the audience and their information needs
(see Section 2.1.1). Therefore, data analysis should be appropriate to the objec-
tives that are being analysed, as set out in the project/programme logframe and
M&E plan. For example:
• Analysis of output indicators is typically used for project/programme moni-
toring to determine whether activities are occurring according to schedule
and budget. Therefore, analysis should occur on a regular basis (e.g. weekly,
monthly and quarterly) to identify any variances or deviations from targets.
This will allow project/programme managers to look for alternative solutions,
address any delays or challenges, reallocate resources, etc.
• Analysis of outcome indicators is typically used to determine intermediate
and long-term impacts or changes – e.g. in people’s knowledge, attitudes
and practices (behaviours). For instance, an outcome indicator, such as HIV
prevalence, will require more complicated analysis than an output indicator
such as the number of condoms distributed. Outcome indicators are usually
measured and analysed less frequently. When analysing this data, it is impor-
tant to bear in mind that it is typically used for a wider audience, including
project/programme managers, senior managers, donors, partners and people
reached.
B. Frequency of data analysis
Data analysis has to be given sufficient time. The time frame for data analysis and
reporting should be realistic for its intended use (discussed above). Accurate
information is of little value if it is too late or infrequent to inform project/pro-
gramme management; a compromise between speed, frequency and accuracy
may be necessary. An important reminder is to avoid allocating excessive time
for data collection (which can lead to data overload), while leaving insufficient
time for analysis.
The frequency of data analysis will largely depend on the frequency of data collection
and the informational needs of users – typically reflected by the reporting schedule
(discussed in Step 4, Section 2.4). A schedule for data analysis can coincide with
key reporting events, or be done separately according to project/programme
needs. Whenever data analysis is scheduled, it is important to remember that it
is not an isolated event at the end of data collection, but is ongoing from project/
programme start and during ongoing monitoring and then evaluation events.
C. Responsibility for data analysis
Roles and responsibilities for data analysis will depend on the type and timing of
analysis. Analysis of monitoring data can be undertaken by those who collect
the data, e.g. field monitoring officers or other project/programme staff. Ideally
there would also be an opportunity to discuss and analyse data in a wider
Avoid over-analysis
Over-analysing data
can be costly and may
complicate decision-
making. Therefore, do
not waste time and
resources analysing
unimportant points.
Instead, focus on what
is necessary and suffi-
cient to inform project/
programme manage-
ment. Therefore, it is
useful to refer to pro-
ject/programme ob-
jectives and indicators
from the logframe to
guide relevant analysis
and specific lessons,
recommendations and
action points that have
been identified and
reported.

50
forum, including other project/programme staff and management, partner or-
ganizations, beneficiaries and other stakeholders.
For evaluation data, analysis will depend on the purpose and type of evaluation.
For instance, if it is an independent, accountability-focused evaluation required by
donors, analysis may be led by external consultants. If it is an internal, learning-
oriented evaluation, the analysis will be undertaken by the IFRC’s implementing
project/programme or organization(s). However, whenever possible, it is advis-
able to involve multiple stakeholders in data analysis – refer to Box 16 below.
Evaluations may also use independent consultants to initially analyse statistical
data, which is then discussed and analysed in a wider forum of stakeholders.
BOX 16: Benefits of involving multiple stakeholders in data analysis
Data analysis is not something that happens behind closed doors among
statisticians, nor should it be done by one person, e.g. the project/pro-
gramme manager, the night before a reporting deadline. Much data
analysis does not require complicated techniques and when multiple per-
spectives are included, greater participation can help cross-check data
accuracy and improve critical reflection, learning and utilization of infor-
mation. A problem, or solution, can look different from the perspective of
a headquarters’ office versus project/programme staff in the field versus
community members. Stakeholder involvement in analysis at all levels
helps ensure M&E will be accepted and regarded as credible. It can also
help build ownership for the follow-up and utilization of findings, conclu-
sions and recommendations.
D. Process for data analysis
Data analysis can employ a variety of forums tailored to the project/pro-
gramme needs and context, including meetings, e-mail correspondence, dia-
logue through internet platforms (e.g. Sharepoint) and conference calls. As Box
16 highlights above, it is best to try to involve as many stakeholders as practical
in such forums, which may require multiple sessions. However it occurs, it is
important that data analysis is structured and planned for and not conducted as an
afterthought or simply to meet a reporting deadline.
Another important consideration is the need for any specialized equipment (e.g.
calculators or computers) or software (e.g. Excel, SPSS, Access, Visio) for data
analysis. Also, if the project/programme team is to be involved in any data entry
or analysis that requires specific technical skills, determine whether such experi-
ence exists among the staff or if training is necessary. These factors can then be
itemized for the M&E budget and human resource development (Steps 5 and 6,
discussed later).
2.3.2 Follow the key data analysis stages
There is no one recipe for data analysis, but five key stages can be identified: 1) Data
preparation; 2) Data analysis; 3) Data presentation; 4) Data verification; and 5)
Recommendations and action planning. The remainder of this section discusses
these five stages. One common consideration throughout all stages of data anal-
ysis is to identify any limitations, biases and threats to the accuracy of the data
and its analysis. Data distortion can occur due to limitations or errors in design,
sampling, field interviews and data recording and analysis (see Section 1.9).
Therefore, it is best to monitor the research process carefully and seek expert
advice when needed.

51
1. Data preparation
Data preparation, often called data “reduction” or “organization”, involves getting
the data into a more usable form for analysis. Data should be prepared according
to its intended use, usually informed by the logframe’s indicators. Typically, this
involves cleaning, editing, coding and organizing “raw” quantitative and quali-
tative data (see Section 2.2.3), as well as cross-checking the data for accuracy
and consistency.27
As quantitative data is numerical, it will need to be prepared for statistical anal-
ysis. It is also at this stage that quantitative data is checked, “cleaned” and cor-
rected for analysis. A number of tools and guidelines are available to assist with
data processing, and are best planned for with technical expertise. The United
Nations’ World Food Programme has identified six useful steps for preparing
quantitative data for analysis:28
1. Nominating a person and setting a procedure to ensure the quality of data
entry
2. Entering numerical variables in spreadsheet or database
3. Entering continuous variable data on spreadsheets
4. Coding and labelling variables
5. Dealing with missing values
6. Data cleaning methods.
For qualitative data (descriptive text, questionnaire responses, pictures, maps,
videos, etc.), it is important to first identify and summarize key points. This may
involve circling important text, summarizing long descriptions into main ideas
(writing summaries in the paper’s margin), or highlighting critical statements,
pictures or other visuals. Key points can then be coded and organized into cat-
egories and subcategories that represent observed trends for further analysis.
A final point worth noting is that data organization can actually begin during
the data collection phase (see Box 14, Section 2.2.10). The format by which data is
recorded and reported can play an important role in organizing data and reinforcing
critical analysis. For example, an indicator tracking table (ITT) can be designed
to report not only the actual indicator performance but also its planned target
and the percentage of target achieved (see Box 15, Section 2.2.11). This rein-
forces critical reflection on variance (the difference between identified targets
and actual results). For narrative reporting formats, sections can be structured
highlighting priority areas that encourage critical analysis – such as best prac-
tices, challenges and constraints, lessons, future action, etc. (see the discussion
on the IFRC’s project/programme management report template in Section 2.4.1).
2. Data analysis (findings and conclusions)
Data analysis can be descriptive or interpretive. Descriptive analysis involves de-
scribing key findings – conditions, states and circumstances uncovered from
the data – while interpretive analysis helps to provide meaning, explanation or
causal relationship from the findings. Descriptive analysis focuses on what hap-
pened, while interpretive analysis seeks to explain why it occurred – what might be
the cause(s). Both are interrelated and useful in information reporting as de-
scriptive analysis informs interpretive analysis. Box 17 (page 52) illustrates
key questions to guide descriptive analysis, with data interpretation questions
highlighted in italic red.
27 Data cleaning is the process
by which data is cleaned
and corrected for analysis.
A number of tools and
guidelines are available to
assist with data processing,
and are best planned for
with technical expertise.
28 For a detailed discussion
of these and other data
analysis considerations,
refer to UN-WFP, 2011, “How
to consolidate, process
and analyse qualitative and
quantitative data,” in Monitoring
& Evaluation Guidelines
(Annex 2, M&E Resources).

52
BOX 17: Data analysis questions to help describe the data
ÎÎ Are there any emerging trends/clusters in the data? If so, why?
ÎÎ Are there any similarities in trends from different sets of data? If so, why?
ÎÎ Is the information showing us what we expected to see (the logframe’s
intended results)? If not, why not? Is there anything surprising and if so, why?
ÎÎ In monitoring progress against plans, is there any variance to objective
targets? If so, why? How can this be rectified or do plans need to be updated?
ÎÎ Are any changes in assumptions/risks being monitored and identified? If
so, why? Does the project/programme need to adapt to these?
ÎÎ Is it sufficient to know the prevalence of a specific condition among a
target population (descriptive statistics), or should generalizations from a
sample group be made about the larger population (inferential statistics)?
ÎÎ Is any additional information or analysis required to help clarify an issue?
It is important when describing data to focus on the objective findings, rather
than interpreting it with opinion or conclusion. However, it is also important to
acknowledge that how the data is described, e.g. what comparisons or statistical
analysis are selected to describe the data, will inevitably have its implied as-
sumptions and affect its interpretation. Therefore, it is best to acknowledge any
assumptions (hypotheses/limitations) as best as possible during the analysis process.
It is also important when analysing data to relate analysis to the project/pro-
gramme’s objectives and respective indicators. At the same time, analysis should be
flexible and examine other trends, whether intended or not. Some common types of
analysis include the following comparisons:

53
ÔÔ Planned versus actual (temporal) comparison: As discussed in Section
2.2.11, variance is the difference between identified targets and actual results,
such as data organized to compare the number of people (households) tar-
geted in a disaster preparedness programme, versus how many were actually
reached. When doing such analysis it is important to explain why any vari-
ance occurred.
ÔÔ Demographic comparison, such as data separated by gender, age or ethnic-
ity to compare the delivery of services to specific vulnerable groups, e.g. in a
poverty-lessening/livelihoods project.
ÔÔ Geographical comparison, such as data described by neighbourhood, or ur-
ban versus rural, e.g. to compare food delivery during an emergency opera-
tion. This is particularly important if certain areas have been more affected
than others.
ÔÔ Thematic comparison, such as data described by donor-driven versus own-
er-driven housing interventions to compare approaches for a shelter recon-
struction programme.
In data description, it is often helpful to use summary tables/matrices, graphs, dia-
grams and other visual aids to help organize and describe key trends/findings – this
can also be used later for data presentation. While this will require different
types of analysis for quantitative versus qualitative data, it is important to take
into consideration both quantitative and qualitative data together. Relating and
comparing both data types helps to best summarize findings and interpret what
is being studied, rather than using separate sets of data.
As quantitative data is numerical, its description and analysis involves statistical
techniques. Therefore, it is useful to briefly discuss the use of statistics in data
analysis.29
Simple statistical analysis (such as percentages) can be done using a
calculator, while more complex statistical analysis, such as survey data, can be
carried out using Excel or statistical software such as SPSS (Statistical Package
for Social Sciences) – often it may be advisable to seek expert statistical advice.
A basic distinction to understand in statistics is the difference between descriptive
and inferential statistics:
ÔÔ Descriptive statistics: Descriptive statistics are used to summarize a single set
of numerical results or scores (e.g. test result patterns) or a sample group;
this method helps to set the context. As the name implies, these statistics
are descriptive and include total numbers, frequency, averages, proportions
and distribution. Two other descriptive concepts important to understand are
prevalence and incidence. Prevalence shows how many people have a specific
condition (e.g. percentage prevalence of HIV/AIDS) or demonstrate a certain
behaviour at a specific point in time. Incidence can show how many new
cases of people with this illness occur in a given period of time (e.g. rate of
occurrence of a disease in a population).
ÔÔ Inferential statistics: Inferential statistics are more complicated, but allow
for generalizations (inferences) to be made about the larger population from
a sample. Two main catgories of inferential statics are: 1) examining dif-
ferences between groups (e.g. differences in outcome indicators between
groups that participated in the same project/programme activities and con-
trol groups outside the project/programme area); 2) examining relationships
between variables, such as cause and effect relationships (e.g. differences in
the number of people with changes in sanitation practices after receiving
sanitation messaging).
29 It is beyond the scope of this
guide to provide detailed
statistical guidelines,
but there are numerous
resources available, some
of which are listed in

54
An important part of inferential analysis is establishing the representativeness
of the sample population from which generalizations (conclusions) are based
(see Section 2.2.5). Random sampling is often used with quantitative data to
allow for more precise statistical analysis and generalizations than purposeful
sampling. Surveys are a common method used with random sampling – see
Section 2.2.6. However, even with the statistical precision of quantitative data, con-
clusions such as causality and attribution may be limited.
For instance, when comparing baseline conditions prior to the intervention of a
livelihoods project with those measured three years later during a final evalu-
ation, can you be sure that the measured change in living standards is due to
the project or some other intervening factors (variable), such as an unforeseen
natural disaster, outbreak of disease or global economic recession? Similar chal-
lenges emerge also with the use of comparison groups – comparing conditions
of populations that have received services with those that have not. Such chal-
lenges contribute to make the measurement of impact a difficult and widely
debated effort among evaluators (see Box 3, Section 1.5).
Triangulation is an important practice to help strengthen conclusions made during
the data interpretation stage (see Section 2.2.4). Data collected should be vali-
dated by different sources and/or methods before being deemed a “fact”. These
separate facts do not in themselves add much value in project planning or de-
cision-making unless put in context and assessed relative to each other and the
project objectives. Interpretation is the process of extracting and presenting
meaning for these separate facts.
3. Data validation
It is important at this point to determine if and how subsequent analysis will occur.
This may be necessary to verify findings, especially with high-profile or contro-
versial findings and conclusions. This may involve identifying additional pri-
mary and/or secondary sources to further triangulate analysis, or comparisons
can be made with other related research studies. For instance, there may need
to be some additional interviews or focus group discussions to further clarify
(validate) a particular finding. Subsequent research can also be used in follow-
up to identified research topics emerging from analysis for project/programme
extension, additional funding or to inform the larger development community.
4. Data presentation
Data presentation seeks to effectively present data so that it highlights key findings
and conclusions. A useful question to answer when presenting data is, “so what?”.
What does all this data mean or tell us – why is it important? Try to narrow down
your answer to the key conclusions that explain the story the data presents and
why it is significant. Some other key reminders in data presentation include:
• Make sure that the analysis or finding you are trying to highlight is suffi-
ciently demonstrated.
• Ensure that data presentation is as clear and simple as accuracy allows for
users to easily understand.
• Keep your audience in mind, so that data presentation can be tailored to the
appropriate level/format (e.g. summary form, verbal or written).
• Avoid using excessively technical jargon or detail.
There are numerous examples/formats of how data can be presented. Some ex-
amples include written descriptions (narratives), matrices/tables, graphs (e.g.
illustrating trends), calendars (e.g. representing seasonal performance), pie and
bar charts (e.g. illustrating distribution or ranking, such as from a proportional

55
piling exercise); mapping (e.g. wealth, hazard, mobility, social, resource, risk,
network, influence and relationships); asset wheels (a variation of pie charts
representing allocation of assets); Venn diagrams (usually made up of circular
areas intersecting where they have elements in common); timelines/histories;
and causal flow diagrams. Whatever format is used, be sure that what you are
trying to show is highlighted clearly.
Box 18 describes the use of a “traffic light” approach to highlight data and per-
formance levels.
Box 18: Using traffic lights to highlight data
One way to highlight key data in its presentation is through a “traffic light” approach that rates data
by either: 1) green for on track against target, 2) orange/amber for slightly off track but likely to meet
target, and 3) red for off target and unlikely to meet target. As shown below, information can be high-
lighted in the indicator tracking table (Section 2.2.11) so it can be easily identified and explained in
the project/programme management report (discussed in Section 2.4.1). This can be a useful method
in reporting and has been adopted by some international donors (e.g. Department for International
Development - DfID).
Examples indicators Target Actual % of
target
Explanation of variance
discussed in project/
programme management
report.
Number of project/
programme beneficiaries
2000 2100 5%
Number of bed nets
distributed
100 0 -100% Delivery of bed nets hindered due
to road access in rainy season.
Lesson learned – distribute before
rainy season.
Number of people trained
to maintain bed nets
500 400 -20% Absence of some trainees due
harvesting season. Lesson learned
– undertake training earlier in year.
5. Recommendations and action planning
Recommendations and action planning are where data is put to use as evidence or
justification for proposed actions. It is closely interrelated with the utilization of
reported information (discussed in Step 4, Section 2.4), but it is presented here
because the process of identifying recommendations usually coincides with
analysing findings and conclusions.
It is important that there is a clear causality or rationale for the proposed actions,
linking evidence to recommendations. It is also important to ensure that recom-
mendations are specific, which will help in data reporting and utilization (dis-
cussed below). Therefore, it is useful to express recommendations as specific
action points that uphold the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, achievable,
relevant and time-bound) and are targeted to the specific stakeholders who will
take them forward. It is also useful to appoint one stakeholder who will follow
up with all others to ensure that actions have been taken.

56
An essential condition for well-formulated recommendations and action planning
is to have a clear understanding and use of them in relation to other data analysis
outputs, findings and conclusions. Therefore, Table 6 provides a summary differ-
entiating these key learning outputs.
TABLE 6: Comparing data analysis terms: findings, conclusions, recommendation and actions
Term Definition Examples
Finding A factual statement
based on primary and
secondary data
ÆÆ Community members reported daily income is below
1 US dollar per day
ÆÆ Participants in community focus group discussions
expressed that they want jobs
Conclusion A synthesized
(combined) interpretation
of findings
ÆÆ Community members are materially poor due to lack
of income-generating opportunities
Recommendation A prescription based on
conclusions
ÆÆ Introduce micro-finance and micro-enterprise
opportunities for community members to start up
culturally appropriate and economically viable income-
generating business
Action A specific prescription
of action to address a
recommendation
ÆÆ By December 2011, form six pilot solidarity groups
to identify potential micro-enterprise ideas and loan
recipients
ÆÆ By January 2011, conduct a market study to
determine the economic viability of potential micro-
enterprise options
ÆÆ Etc.

57
2.4 Step 4 – Plan for information
reporting and utilization
2.4.1 Anticipate and plan for reporting:
A. Needs/audience
B. Frequency
C. Formats
D. People responsible.
2.4.2 Plan for information utilization:
A. Information dissemination
B. Decision-making and planning.
Having defined the project/programme’s informational needs and how data will
be collected, managed and analysed, the next step is to plan how the data will
be reported as information and put to good use. Reporting is the most visible part
of the M&E system, where collected and analysed data is presented as information
for key stakeholders to use. Reporting is a critical part of M&E because no matter
how well data may be collected and analysed, if it is not well presented it cannot
be well used – which can be a considerable waste of valuable time, resources and
personnel. Sadly, there are numerous examples where valuable data has proved
valueless because it has been poorly reported on.

58
2.4.1 Anticipate and plan for reporting
Reporting can be costly in both time and resources and should not become an end in
itself, but serve a well-planned purpose. Therefore, it is critical to anticipate and
carefully plan for reporting. Box 19 summarizes key reporting criteria to help
ensure its usability.
Box 19: Criteria of good reporting
ÎÎ Relevant and useful. Reporting should serve a specific purpose/use.
Avoid excessive, unnecessary reporting – information overload is costly
and can burden information flow and the potential of using other more
relevant information.
ÎÎ Timely. Reporting should be timely for its intended use. Information is
of little value if it is too late or infrequent for its intended purpose.
ÎÎ Complete. Reporting should provide a sufficient amount of information
for its intended use. It is especially important that reporting content in-
cludes any specific reporting requirements.
ÎÎ Reliable. Reporting should provide an accurate representation of the facts.
ÎÎ Simple and user-friendly. Reporting should be appropriate for its in-
tended audience. The language and reporting format used should be
clear, concise and easy to understand.
ÎÎ Consistent. Reporting should adopt units and formats that allow com-
parison over time, enabling progress to be tracked against indicators,
targets and other agreed-upon milestones.
ÎÎ Cost-effective. Reporting should warrant the time and resources de-
voted to it, balanced against its relevance and use (above).
A valuable tool when planning for reporting is a reporting schedule, matching each
reporting requirement with its frequency, audience/purpose, format/outlet and
person(s) responsible. Annex 18 provides an example reporting schedule tem-
plate. The remainder of this section will discuss key aspects of reporting sum-
marized in this schedule.
A. Identify the specific reporting needs/audience
Reports should be prepared for a specific purpose/audience. This informs the ap-
propriate content, format and timing for the report. For example, do users need
information for ongoing project/programme implementation, strategic plan-
ning, compliance with donor requirements, evaluation of impact and/or organi-
zational learning for future project/programmes?
As already noted, it is best to identify reporting and other informational needs
early in the M&E planning process, especially any reporting requirements (see
Step 1, Section 2.1). Therefore, a completed M&E stakeholder assessment table
(Annex 6) is a valuable tool for report planning, as well as the “informational
use/audience” column in the M&E plan table (Annex 8).

59
A particularly important consideration in planning for reporting is the distinction
between internal and external reporting (see Box 20 on page 60). Internal reporting
is conducted to enable actual project/programme implementation; it plays a
more crucial role in lesson learning to facilitate decision-making – and, ulti-
mately, what can be extracted and reported externally. External reporting is
conducted to inform stakeholders outside the project/programme team and
implementing organization; this is important for accountability.
Day-to-day operations depend upon a regular and reliable flow of information.
Therefore, special attention should be given to the informational needs of the
project/programme managers. They will need timely information to analyse
project/programme progress and critical issues, make planning decisions and
prepare progress reports for multiple audiences, e.g. superiors and donors. In
turn, project-level reports provide essential information for programme man-
agers and country directors to compare planned actions with actual perfor-
mance and budget.
Warning
Reporting should limit
itself only to what is
necessary and suffi-
cient for its intended
purpose. The deci-
sions made about
what to report on
will have an “ex-
ponential” effect
that can increase
the workload on the
whole M&E system
and the overall pro-
j e c t / p r o g r a m m e
capacity because it
determines time,
people and resources
needed to collect,
manage and analyse
data for reporting.
Information over-
load st rains t he
project/programme
team’s capacity and
can actually burden
the flow (effective-
ness) of informa-
tion. This distracts
not only resources
but also attention
away from the more
relevant and useful
information. Extra
information is more
often a burden than
a luxury.

60
Box 20: Internal versus external reporting
Internal reporting External reporting
• Primary audience is the project/
programme team and the organi-
zation in which it operates.
• Primary purpose is to inform on-
going project management and
decision-making (monitoring re-
porting).
• Frequency is on a regular basis
according to project monitoring
needs.
• Content is comprehensive in con-
tent, providing information that
can be extracted for various ex-
ternal reporting needs.
• Format is typically determined
by the project team according to
what will best serve the project/
programme needs and its organi-
zational culture.
• Primary audience is stakeholders
outside of the immediate team/
organization (e.g. donors, ben-
eficiaries, partner organizations,
international bodies, and govern-
ments).
• Primary purpose is typically for
accountability, credibility, to
solicit funds, celebrate accom-
plishments and highlight any
challenges and how they are
being addressed.
• Frequency is less often in the form
of periodic assessments (evalua-
tions).
• Content is concise, typically ab-
stracted from internal reports
and focused on communication
points (requirements) specific to
the targeted audience.
• Format is often determined by
external requirements or prefer-
ences of intended audience.
Diagram 4 (page 61) provides an example of programme reporting that can be
useful in understanding the flow of information to key stakeholders. The blue
arrows show which reporting lines are internal to the project/programme team
(branch, monitoring officer, manager, senior management), while the red ar-
rows represent reporting to stakeholders outside the project/programme team
(community, partners, donors, Board of Directors).

61
Diagram 4: An example of information flows in project/programme reporting
B. Determine the reporting frequency
It is critical to identify realistic reporting deadlines. They should be feasible in rela-
tion to the time, resources and capacity necessary to produce and distribute re-
ports including data collection, analysis and feedback. Some key points to keep
in mind in planning the reporting frequency:
1. Reporting frequency should be based upon the informational needs of the intend-
ed audience, timed so that it can inform key project/programme planning,
decision-making and accountability events.
2. Reporting frequency will also be influenced by the complexity and cost of data
collection. For instance, it is much easier and affordable to report on a process
indicator for the number of workshop participants than an outcome indica-
tor that measures behavioural change in a random sample, household survey
(which entails more time and resources).
3. Data may be collected regularly, but not everything needs to be reported to every-
one all the time. For example:
• A security officer might want monitoring situational reports on a daily
basis in a conflict setting
• A field officer may need weekly reports on process indicators around ac-
tivities to monitor project/programme implementation
• A project/programme manager may want monthly reports on outputs/ser-
vices delivered to check if they are on track
• Project/programme management may want quarterly reports on outcome
indicators of longer-term change
• An evaluation team may want baseline and endline reports on impact
indicators during the project start and end.
Internal reporting
Internal feedback
Community Branch
Monitoring
Ofﬁcer
Programme
Manager
Senior
Manager
Donors
Partners
(Red Cross,
CBOs, Govt,
UN, NGOs)
Board
External reporting
External feedback

62
C. Determine specific reporting formats
Once the reporting audience (who), purpose (why) and timing (when) have been
identified, it is then important to determine the key reporting formats that are
most appropriate for the intended user(s). This can vary from written docu-
ments to video presentations posted on the internet. Sometimes the reporting
format must adhere to strict requirements, while at other times there can be
more flexibility.
The IFRC has defined reporting templates for many technical areas, as well as
for many donor reports and communications, with related links to the donor
reporting web pages. Box 21 summarizes different types of reports (and for-
mats) that may be used for reporting, and below we specifically discuss a
recommended IFRC format for a project/programme management report.
Box 21: Example reporting formats
• Project management
reports (Annex 19)
• Evaluation reports
• Programme updates,
mid-year and annual
reports
• Operational updates
• Donor-specific reports
(e.g. ECHO)
• Situation reports, e.g.
FACT reports, infor-
mation bulletin, secu-
rity updates, etc.
• Activity/event reports
• Memos
• Pictures/videos
• Brochure, pamphlets,
handouts, posters
• Newsletters, bulletins
• Professional perfor-
mance reports (of
an individual staff
member or volunteer,
etc.)
• Press releases
• Public presentations
– conferences or com-
munity meetings
• Success stories, case
studies
• Popular publications,
e.g. magazine, news-
paper, or web site
• Scientific publications
in a referred article,
paper or book
Resources
Refer to the IFRC’s pro-
gramme/sector areas
section in Annex 2 for
resources specific to
technical focus.

63
It is important that report formats and content are appropriate for their intended
users. How information is presented during the reporting stage can play a key
role in how well it is understood and put to use. For example, reports with
graphs and charts may work well with project/programme management, par-
ticipatory discussion meetings with field staff, community (visual) mapping
for beneficiaries and a glossy report or web site for donors. Reporting should be
translated in the appropriate language and in a culturally appropriate format
(e.g. summary form, verbal or written). Building on the criteria of good reporting
introduced at the beginning of this section (Box 19, see 2.4.1), Box 22 summa-
rizes some practical tips to help make your written reports more effective.
Box 22: Report writing tips
ÎÎ Be timely – this means planning the report-writing beforehand and allowing
sufficient time.
ÎÎ Involve others in the writing process, but ensure one focal person is ulti-
mately responsible.
ÎÎ Translate reports to the appropriate language.
ÎÎ Use an executive summary or project overview to summarize the overall pro-
ject status and highlight any key issues/actions to be addressed.
ÎÎ Devote a section in the report to identify specific actions to be taken in re-
sponse to the report findings and recommendations and the respective people
responsible and time frame.
ÎÎ Be clear, concise, avoiding long sentences – avoid jargon, excessive statistics
and technical terms.
ÎÎ Use formatting, such as bold or underline, to highlight key points.
ÎÎ Use graphics, photos, quotations and examples to highlight or explain in-
formation.
ÎÎ Be accurate, balanced and impartial.
ÎÎ Use logical sections to structure and organize the report.
ÎÎ Avoid unnecessary information and words.
ÎÎ Adhere to any IFRC/corporate formats, writing usage/style guidelines and
appropriate use of the IFRC’s emblem.
ÎÎ Check spelling and grammar.
The project/programme management report
Particular attention should be given the project/programme management report because
it typically forms the basis for internal information that will, in turn, provide informa-
tion for external reporting. Other reporting formats may occur more frequently, e.g.
for specific activities, or less frequently, such as evaluation reports, but the project/
programme management report is usually the primary reporting mechanism for
compiling information from various reports for project/programme management
and providing information for other reports for accountability.
Project/programme management reports should be undertaken at a frequency regular
enough to monitor project/programme progress and identify any challenges or delays
with sufficient time to adequately respond. Most organizations undertake manage-
ment reporting on a monthly or quarterly basis; there are pros and cons to both.

64
Monthly reporting allows for a more regular overview of activities which can be
useful, particularly in a fast-changing context, such as during an emergency op-
eration. However, more frequent data collection and analysis can be challenging if
monitoring resources are limited. Quarterly reports allow for more time between
reports, with less focus on activities and more on change in the form of outputs
and even outcomes.
Box 23 summarizes the key components of the recommended IFRC project/pro-
gramme management report, while Annex 19 provides the full template with
detailed instructions for completing it.
Box 23: IFRC project/programme management report outline
(refer to Annex 19 for full template)
1. Project/programme information. Summary of key project/programme
information, e.g. name, dates, manager, codes, etc.
2. Executive summary. Overall summary of the report, capturing the project
status and highlighting key accomplishments, challenges, and planned
actions. Also includes the Federation-Wide Reporting System (FWRS)
indicators for people reached and volunteers.
3. Financial status. Concise overview of the project/programme’s financial
status based on the project/programme’s monthly finance reports for
the reporting quarter.
4. Situation/context analysis (positive and negative factors). Identify and dis-
cuss any factors that affect the project/programme’s operating context
and implementation (e.g. change in security or a government policy, etc),
as well as related actions to be taken.
5. Analysis of implementation. Critical section of analysis based on the
objectives as stated in the project/programme’s logframe and data re-
corded in the project/programme indicator tracking table (ITT).
6. Stakeholder participation and complaints. Summary of key stakeholders’
participation and any complaints that have been filed.
7. Partnership agreements and other key actors. Lists any project/programme
partners and agreements (e.g. project/programme agreement, MoU), and
any related comments.
8. Cross-cutting issues. Summary of activities undertaken or results achie-
ved that relate to any cross-cutting issues (gender equality, environmen-
tal sustainability, etc).
9. Project/programme staffing – human resources. Lists any new personnel
or other changes in project/programme staffing. Also should include
whether any management support is needed to resolve any issues.
10. Exit/sustainability strategy summary. Update on the progress of the sus-
tainability strategy to ensure the project/programme objectives will be
able to continue after handover to local stakeholders.
11. PMER status. Concise update of the project/programme’s key planning,
monitoring, evaluation and reporting activities.
12. Key lessons. Highlights key lessons and how they can be applied to this
or other similar projects/programmes in future.
13. Report annex. Project/programme’s ITT and any other supplementary
information.

65
D. Identify people responsible for reporting products
It is important to specifically identify the people who will be responsible for
each type of report. This can be the same person identified in the M&E plan who
collects indicator data (see Section 2.2.1), or it may be another person who spe-
cifically prepares the data to communicate to others, e.g. the person(s) who pre-
pares a monthly project report, donor progress report or press releases. It also
includes people who present and share M&E data at forums such as community
meetings, conference calls with headquarters, partnership presentations, etc. It
does not need to include everyone involved in the reporting process, but the key
person with overall responsibility for each reporting product/type.
It is worth remembering that whoever is reporting, it is important that they do
so according to requirements, and that reported information is timely and reli-
able. This may seem obvious but, as Box 24 highlights below, there are often
complex difficulties or “roadblocks” that need to be addressed to achieve timely
and reliable reporting.
BOX 24: Reporting roadblocks and solutions
Project/programme progress and problems need to be reported to iden-
tify solutions and lessons to inform current and future programming.
However, sometimes there can be some complex barriers to timely and ef-
fective data analysis and reporting.
ÎÎ “We do not have the time.” This attitude can occur when the project
team focuses on the goal and a perceived shortage of time rather than
on assessing the processes needed to attain the goal. A solution is to
help people understand how timely analysis and reporting can help save
time, improve processes, uphold accountability and better reach goals.
ÎÎ “It doesn’t make a difference anyhow.” There can be a sense that re-
porting is a bureaucratic exercise and the reporting data is not fully put
to use. A solution is to help people understand how the reporting infor-
mation is worthwhile and used, and to involve the team members more
actively in the data analysis and reporting so they contribute to and
have more ownership in the process.
ÎÎ “Data analysis is for experts, not us.” This misperception occurs be-
cause people perceive they lack the technical skills to do the data anal-
ysis. A solution is to help people better understand data analysis and
that it does not necessarily require complex statistical methods, and
to provide them with appropriate tools, guidelines and training (as dis-
cussed in this section) to better analyse data.
ÎÎ Fear of variance. This can occur when people do not want to be perceived
as doing a poor job if variance reflects underperformance. A solution
is to help them understand that it is rare for a project to meet all of its
targets, all of the time. Model openness to feedback and demonstrate a
partnership attitude that does not frame underperformance as bad news
but an opportunity to learn. Remind them that it is only a failure if they
fail to learn.

66
2.4.2 Plan for information utilization
The overall purpose of the M&E system is to provide useful information.
Therefore, information utilization should not be an afterthought, but a central
planning consideration. For this reason, identifying stakeholder informational
needs (initially discussed in M&E planning Step 1, Section 2.1) has been a recur-
ring topic throughout all M&E planning steps.
Box 25 summarizes four primary ways in which M&E information is used. There
are many factors that determine the use of information. First are the actual se-
lection, collection and transformation of data into usable information, which
has been the topic of this guide so far. Ideally, this process produces informa-
tion that is relevant, timely, complete, consistent, reliable and user-friendly (see
Box 19, Section 2.4.1). The remainder of this section will briefly look at key con-
siderations for information distribution, decision-making and planning.
Box 25: Key categories of information use
ÎÎ Project/programme management – inform decisions to guide and improve
ongoing project/programme implementation.
ÎÎ Learning and knowledge-sharing – advance organizational learning and
knowledge-sharing for future programming, both within and external to
the project/programme’s implementing organization.
ÎÎ Accountability and compliance – demonstrating how and what work has been
completed, and whether it was according to any specific donor or legal re-
quirements, as well as to the IFRC and others’ international standards.
ÎÎ Celebration and advocacy – highlight and promote accomplishments and
achievements, building morale and contributing to resource mobilization.
A. Information dissemination
Information dissemination refers to how information (reports) is distributed to
users. This can be seen as part of reporting, but we use dissemination here to
mean the distribution of the information (reports) rather than the actual prepa-
ration of the information into a report.
There is a variety of mediums to share information, and as with the reporting
formats themselves, how reporting information is disseminated will largely
depend on the user and purpose of information. Box 26 summarizes some dif-
ferent mediums for sharing information.
Box 26: Key mediums of information dissemination
1. Print materials distributed through mail or in person.
2. Internet communication, e.g. e-mail (and attachments), web sites, blogs, etc
3. Radio communication includes direct person-to-person radio (ham radio),
as well as broadcasting radio.
4. Telephone communication includes voice calls, text-messaging, as well
as other functions enabled on a mobile phone.
5. Television and filmed presentations.
6. Live presentations, such as project/programme team meetings and public
meetings.

67
Selection of the reporting medium should be guided by what is most efficient in time
and resources, and suitable for the audience – a process that should ideally be
completed with a reporting schedule (see Annex 18). For instance:
ÔÔ An internet-based reporting system may be best for communication between
a project/programme management team and its headquarters.
ÔÔ Community meetings may be appropriate to report on data to beneficiaries
who lack access to computers or are illiterate.
ÔÔ Mobile phone texting may be most timely and efficient for volunteers to re-
port on safety conditions from the field.
It is also important to remember that information dissemination should be multi-
directional. This means that in addition to distributing information upwards to
management, senior management and donors, information flows should also be
directed to field staff, partners and the beneficiaries themselves.
Another important consideration when distributing information is the security of
internal or confidential information. As discussed with data management (see
Section 2.2.10), precautions should be taken to protect assess to confidential
information.
B. Decision-making and planning
Decision-making and planning really form the heart of data utilization. But no
matter how well the information is prepared or disseminated, it will ultimately
be up to the user to decide when and how to put it to use. This is where M&E
planning merges with project/programme management, and the manner
in which decisions are made and information is used will vary according to
project/programme, context and organizational culture. However, while in-
formation use is largely in the area of project/programme and organizational
management, there are two key considerations that can aid the use of informa-
tion in decision-making and planning:
1. Stakeholder dialogue. Stakeholder discussion and feedback on information is
critical for building understanding and ownership, and informing the appro-
priate response. This process can begin during the analysis, review and revi-
sion of reporting information, and can correspond with information dissemi-
nation outlets, such as meetings, seminars and workshops, web-based forums,
teleconferences and/or organizational reporting and follow-up procedures.
For instance, the findings of an evaluation report are more likely to be un-
derstood and used if they are not limited to a printed report, but presented
to key stakeholders in a face-to-face forum that allows them to reflect and
give feedback. Ideally, this can be done before the final draft of the report to
confirm key lessons and inform realistic recommendations.
2. Management response. Specific procedures for documenting and responding
to information findings and recommendations (often called “management re-
sponse”) should be built into the project/programme management system.
At the project/programme level, this can be a management action plan with
clear responses to key issues identified in a management or evaluation report.
This should specifically explain what actions will be taken, including their
time frame and responsibilities; it should also explain why any recommenda-
tion or identified issue may not be addressed. Follow-up should be systematic
and monitored and reported on in a reliable, timely and public manner.
There is a variety of tools to support action planning and follow-up. Annex 20
presents three examples of tables (also called “logs”) for recording key items

68
in a management response. A decision log can be used to keep a record of key
project/programme decisions. This can allow staff to check that decisions are
acted upon, and are recorded for institutional memory. This can be referred
to if any disagreement arises over why a decision was made and who was
responsible for following it up, something which can also be useful for audit
purposes. Similarly, an action log can be used by project/programme manag-
ers to ensure that follow-up action is taken.
Both decision and action logs can serve as useful records of specific responses
to project/programme issues and related actions identified in a manage-
ment or evaluation report. As already noted, this can be supported by well-
designed project/programme reporting formats that include a section on
future action planning (e.g. the IFRC’s project/programme management
report, see Annex 19).
Another useful tool is a lessons learned log (see Annex 20), which is used to
catalogue and prioritize key lessons. This can then be used to inform ongo-
ing project/programme decision-making, as well as the strategic planning
for future project/programmes, contributing to overall organizational learn-
ing and knowledge-sharing.

69
2.5 Step 5 – Plan for M&E human
resources and capacity building
An effective M&E system requires capable people to support it. While the M&E
plan identifies responsibilities for the data collection on each indicator, it is also
important to plan for the people responsible for M&E processes, including data
management, analysis, reporting and M&E training. This section summarizes
key considerations in planning for the human resources and capacity building
for a project/programme’s M&E system.
2.5.1 Assess the projects/programme’s human resources
capacity for M&E
A first step in planning for M&E human resources is to determine the available
M&E experience within the project/programme team, partner organizations,
target communities and any other potential participants in the M&E system. It
is important to identify any gaps between the project/programme’s M&E needs
(see Step 1, Section 2.1) and available personnel, which will inform the need for
capacity building or outside expertise.
Key questions to guide this process include:
ÔÔ Is there existing M&E expertise among the project/programme team? How
does this match with the M&E needs of the project/programme?
ÔÔ Is there M&E support from the organization implementing the project/pro-
gramme? For instance, is there a technical unit or individuals assigned with
M&E responsibilities to advise and support staff, and if so, what is their avail-
ability for the specific project/programme?
ÔÔ Do the target communities (or certain members) and other project/pro-
gramme partners have any experience in M&E?
It can be useful to refer to the discussions about the M&E stakeholder assess-
ment (Section 2.1.2) and the M&E activity planning (Section 2.1.4) to guide this
process. When available, any larger organizational assessment that has in-
cluded M&E should be referred to for projects/programmes belonging to the
organization. For example, the IFRC’s secretariat offers a planning, monitoring,
evaluation and reporting assessment tool for National Societies and project/
programme teams, which can help assess the institutional understanding and
practice of M&E for an implementing National Society or for the project/pro-
gramme team itself.30
2.5.2 Determine the extent of local participation
Ideally, data collection and analysis is undertaken with the very people to whom
these processes and decisions most relate. This is an important principle for the
Movement (see Box 27 next page), which prioritizes the involvement of local
volunteers and communities. Often, local participation in M&E is expected or
required, and building local capacity to sustain the project/programme is iden-
tified as a key objective of the project/programme itself.
30 Refer to the IFRC-PAD M&E
Capacity Assessment Tool.

70
BOX 27: Principle Seven of the Conduct for International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief
Ways shall be found to involve programme beneficiaries in the manage-
ment of relief aid. Disaster response assistance should never be imposed
upon the beneficiaries. Effective relief and lasting rehabilitation can best be
achieved where the intended beneficiaries are involved in the design, man-
agement and implementation of the assistance programme. We will strive
to achieve full community participation in our relief and rehabilitation.
Participation can happen at multiple levels in the M&E system. As Diagram
5 illustrates below, participation happens on a continuum: at one end of the
spectrum the M&E system can be completely participatory, where local stake-
holders actively participate in all processes and decision-making, while at the
other end it can be top-down, in which local stakeholders are restricted to
subjects of observation or study. Ultimately, the degree of participation will
vary according to the project/programme and context. Some examples of M&E
participation include:
• The use of participatory assessments, e.g. vulnerability capacity assessments
(VCAs) or community SWOT (strength-weakness-opportunity-threats) analysis
• Involvement of local representatives in the project/programme design (log-
frame) and identification of indicators
• Participatory monitoring where elected community representatives reporting
on key monitoring indicators
• Self-evaluations using simple methods adapted to the local context, e.g. most
significant change and participatory project reviews (refer to Annex 2, M&E
Resources)
• Sharing monitoring and evaluation findings with community members for
participatory analysis and identification or recommendations
• Utilization of feedback mechanisms for beneficiaries, volunteers and staff
(see Section 2.2.8).
Diagram 5: The participatory continuum
Beneficiaries
decide
if/what/how
to evaluate
Beneficiaries
decide
questions
to answer
Beneficiaries
participate
in data
collection &
analysis
Beneficiaries
are a
consulted
data source
(interviews &
focus
groups)
Beneficiaries
are an
observed
data source
Beneficiaries
are a
secondary
data source
Participatory Top-down

71
There are many benefits to local participation in M&E, but it is also important to
recognize some of the potential drawbacks – see Box 27 page 70. It is important
to note that participatory approaches should not exclude or “sideline” outsiders
and the technical expertise, insights and perspectives they can provide. The
IFRC recommends the use of a balance of participatory and non-participatory M&E
according to the project/programme needs and context.
Box 28: Considering participatory M&E
Potential advantages Potential disadvantages
ÎÎ Empowers beneficiaries to analyse
and act on their own situation (as
“active participants” rather than
“passive recipients”)
ÎÎ Builds local capacity and ownership
to manage and sustain the project.
People are likely to accept and inter-
nalize findings and recommenda-
tions that they provide
ÎÎ Develops collaboration and con-
sensus at different levels – between
beneficiaries, local staff and part-
ners, and senior management
ÎÎ Reinforces beneficiary account-
ability, preventing one perspective
from dominating the M&E process
ÎÎ Can save money and time in data
collection compared with the cost
of using project/programme staff or
hiring outside support
ÎÎ Provides timely and relevant infor-
mation directly from the field for
management decision-making to ex-
ecute corrective actions
ÎÎ Requires more time and cost
to train and manage local staff
and community members
ÎÎ Requires skilled facilitators
to ensure that everyone un-
derstands the process and is
equally involved
ÎÎ Can jeopardize the quality
of collected data due to local
politics. Data analysis and
decision-making can be dom-
inated by the more powerful
voices in the community (re-
lated to gender, ethnic, or re-
ligious factors)
ÎÎ Demands the genuine com-
mitment of local people and
the support of donors, since
the project/programme may
not use the traditional in-
dicators or formats for re-
porting findings
Source: Adopted from Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. Monitoring and Evaluation Planning. American Red Cross/CRS
M&E Module Series. American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Washington, DC, and Baltimore, MD.

72
2.5.3 Determine the extent of outside expertise
Outside specialists (consultants) are usually employed for technical expertise, objec-
tivity and credibility, to save time and/or as a donor requirement. Clearly, and espe-
cially for external evaluators, experience, reliability and credibility are essential
when considering whether or not to use outside expertise.
Examples of when outside expertise is used include:
• For the independent, final evaluation of all secretariat-funded projects/
programmes exceeding 1,000,000 Swiss francs (in accordance with the IFRC’s
management policy for evaluations)
• As part of a joint, real-time evaluation for a disaster response operation involv-
ing the IFRC, OCHA (United Nations’ Office for the Coordination of Humanitar-
ian Affairs) and other participating partners, such as CARE International
• To administer random samples for household surveys during a baseline or
endline study
• For project/programme data entry and statistical analysis
• For the translation of project/programme documents.
Sometimes, a project/programme or implementing organization may need to hire a
specific person to oversee M&E processes – e.g. an M&E officer or advisor. Annex 20
provides an example of an M&E job description and the following summarizes
key steps in the hiring process:31
1. Identify M&E needs for the staff position
2. Create a job description
3. Establish a hiring committee and outline the hiring process
4. Advertise for the position
5. Sort, short-list, and pre-screen applicants
6. Interview the candidates
7. Hire and train new staff.
2.5.4 Define the roles and responsibilities for M&E
It is important to have well-defined roles and responsibilities at each level of the
M&E system. The M&E plan (Step 2, Section 2.2) identifies people responsible
for the specific collection of data on each indicator, but there are other respon-
sibilities throughout the M&E system, from data management and analysis to
reporting and feedback. This will ultimately depend on the scope of the pro-
ject/programme and what systems are already in place within the project/pro-
gramme and/or the implementing organization (see Section 2.1.4).
Typically, there is a wide range of people with some kind of monitoring respon-
sibilities within their job descriptions – including not only project/programme
staff but maybe volunteers, community members and other partners. When
identifying roles and responsibilities for M&E it is worth considering using the
M&E stakeholder assessment table (Annex 6 and discussed in Step 1 – Section
2.1), or an organizational diagram for the project/programme (with accompa-
nying text). Specific consideration should be given to the M&E qualifications
and expectations, including the approximate percentage of time each person
is expected to allocate to M&E. This will help with practical work planning, as
well as in the preparation of project/programme job descriptions and terms of
reference (ToR).
One key planning consideration is who will have overall management responsi-
bility for the M&E system. It is important to clearly identify who will be the
primary resource person that others, internal and external to the project/
programme, will turn to for M&E guidance and accountability. This person
31 Source: Hagens, Clara, 2008.
Hiring M&E Staff. American
Red Cross/CRS M&E Module
Series. American Red
Cross and Catholic Relief
Services (CRS), Washington,
DC, and Baltimore, MD.

73
(or their team) should oversee the coordination and supervision of M&E func-
tions, and “backstop” (screen) any problems that arise. They need to have a
clear understanding of the overall M&E system, and will likely be the person(s)
leading the M&E planning process.
2.5.5 Plan to manage project/programme team’s M&E
activities
Whether project/programme staff, volunteers, community members, or other
partners involved in the M&E system, it is important to develop tools and mech-
anisms to manage their time and performance. As discussed in Step 2 (Section
2.2), the M&E plan helps define these roles and the time frames. It is also im-
portant to include this planning as part of the overall performance monitoring
system for staff/volunteers, as discussed in Section 2.2.9. Other tools, such as
time sheets, are usually available from an organization’s human resources (HR)
department/unit. Finally, as with beneficiaries themselves, it is critical to up-
hold sound, ethical HR practices in the management of staff and volunteers –
see Box 28, Section 2.5.2.
BOX 29: Adhering to human resources codes and standards –
People in Aid
Managing human resources effectively has been identified as a consider-
able challenge in the humanitarian sector, where deployments of the right
people with the right skills, to the right place at the right time is critical for
successful operations. To facilitate this, the organization People in Aid’s
Code of Good Practice seeks to “improve agencies’ support and manage-
ment of their staff and volunteers,” which is critical to the success of deliv-
ering our work. The code has seven principles, around HR strategy, policies
and practice; monitoring progress against its application seeks to, “enable
employers to become clearer about their responsibilities and accountabili-
ties, and help them become better managers of people, and therefore better
providers of quality assistance.”
2.5.6 Identify M&E capacity-building requirements
and opportunities
Once roles and responsibilities have been determined, it is important to specify
any M&E training requirements. For longer-term projects/programmes, or those
with significant training needs, it may be useful to create an M&E training
schedule (planning table), identifying key training sessions, their schedule, lo-
cation, participants and allocated budget – see Annex 22.
M&E training can be formal or informal. Informal training includes on-the-job
guidance and feedback, such as mentorship in completing checklists, com-
menting on a report or guidance on how to use data management tools.
Formal training can include courses and workshops on project/programme de-
sign (logframes), M&E planning, data collection, management, analysis and
reporting, etc. Formal training should be tailored towards the project/pro-
gramme’s specific needs and audience. This can involve an outside trainer
coming to the project/programme team/site, sending participants to training/
workshops, online training or academic courses.
Resources
The IFRC secretariat’s
planning and account-
abilit y depar t ment
(PAD) and zone PMER
offices offer a range
training and resources
for capacity building
in project/programme
planning, monitoring,
evaluation, and re-
porting. Key resources
are listed in Annex 2,
M&E Resources.

74
2.6 Step 6 – Prepare the M&E
budget
It is best to begin systematically planning the M&E budget early in the project/pro-
gramme design process so that adequate funds are allocated and available for M&E
activities. The following section summarizes key considerations for planning the
project/programme’s M&E budget.
2.6.1 Itemize M&E budget needs
If the M&E planning has been approached systematically, identifying key steps and
people involved, detailing budget items should be straightforward. Start by listing
M&E tasks and associated costs. If a planning table for key M&E activities (see
Section 2.1.4 and Annex 7) has been prepared, this can be used to guide the
process. If there is a required format for itemizing budget items – e.g. within
the implementing organization or from the donor – adhere to the format or an
agreed-upon variation. Otherwise, prepare a spreadsheet clearly itemizing M&E
expenses. It is particularly important to budget for any “big-ticket items”, such
as baseline surveys and evaluations.
Examples of budget items include:
• Human resources. Budget for staffing, including full-time staff, external con-
sultants, capacity building/training and other related expenses, e.g. transla-
tion, data entry for baseline surveys, etc.
• Capital expenses. Budget for facility costs, office equipment and supplies, any
travel and accommodation, computer hardware and software, printing, pub-
lishing and distributing M&E documents, etc.
In addition to itemizing expenses in a spreadsheet, a narrative (description) jus-
tifying each line item can help guard against unexpected budget cuts. It may be
necessary to clarify or justify M&E expenses, such as wage rates not normally
paid to comparable positions, fees for consultants and external experts, or the
various steps in a survey that add up in cost (e.g. development and testing of
a questionnaire, translation and back-translation, training in data collection,
data collectors’ and field supervisors’ daily rates, travel/accommodation costs
for administering the survey, data analysis and write-up, etc).
2.6.2 Incorporate M&E costs into the project/programme
budget
Costs associated with regular project/programme monitoring and undertaking eval-
uations should be included in the project/programme budget, rather than as part of
the organization’s overhead (organizational development or administrative costs).
Therefore, the true cost of a project/programme will be reflected in the budget.
Otherwise, including M&E costs as an administrative or organizational devel-
opment cost may incorrectly suggest inefficiencies in the project/programme
and the implementing organization, with donors reluctant to cover such costs
when in reality they are project-related costs. Ideally, financial systems should
allow for activity-based costing where monitoring costs are linked to project/
programme activities being monitored.

75
If the budget has already been completed with the project/programme proposal,
determine whether there is a separate/appropriated budget for M&E purposes.
Ongoing monitoring expenses may already be built into staff time and ex-
penditure budgets for the overall project/programme operation, such as sup-
port for an information management system, field transportation and vehicle
maintenance, translation, and printing and publishing of M&E documents/
tools. Certain M&E events, such as a baseline study or external evaluation, may
not have been included in the overall project/programme budget because the
budget was planned during the proposal preparation period, before the M&E
system had been developed. In such instances it is critical to ensure that these
M&E costs are added to the project/programme budget.
2.6.3 Review any donor budget requirements
and contributions
Identify any specific budgeting requirements or guidance from the funding
agency or implementing organization. If multiple funding sources are utilized,
ensure that the budget is broken down by donor source. Determine if there are
any additional costs the donor(s) will or will not cover, such as required evalua-
tions, baseline studies, etc. Check with the finance unit or officer to ensure the
budget is prepared in the appropriate format.
2.6.4 Plan for cost contingency
Contingency costs refer to unexpected costs that may arise during project/programme
implementation – in this case the M&E system. It is important to plan for unex-
pected contingencies such as inflation, currency devaluation, equipment theft
or the need for additional data collection/analysis to verify findings. Although
budget planning seeks to avoid these risks, unexpected expenses do arise.
BOX 30: How much money should be allocated for M&E?
There is no set formula for determining the budget for a project/pro-
gramme’s M&E system. During initial planning, it can be difficult to deter-
mine this until more careful attention is given to specific M&E functions
described in the following steps. However, an industry standard is that be-
tween 3 and 10 per cent of a project/programme’s budget be allocated to
M&E. A general rule of thumb is that the M&E budget should not be so small
as to compromise the accuracy and credibility of results, but neither should it
divert project/programme resources to the extent that programming is impaired.
Sometimes certain M&E functions, especially monitoring, are included as
part of the project/programme’s activities. Other functions, such as inde-
pendent evaluations, should be specifically budgeted. The IFRC’s manage-
ment policy for evaluations states that a dedicated budget line between 3
and 5 per cent should be included for all evaluations of interventions above
200,000 Swiss francs.32
32 Frankel, Nina and Gage,
Anastasia for USAID (2007)
M&E Fundamentals: A Self-
Guided Minicourse: p. 11; The
Global Fund (2009), Monitoring
and Evaluation Toolkit: p.
42; UNICEF (2007), UNICEF
Evaluation Policy: p. 8.

76
ValérieBatselaere/IFRC

77
Annex 1 Glossary of key terms for M&E
Annex 1: Glossary of key terms for M&E 33
This glossary is not comprehensive, but only defines key terms as they are typically used in the context
of IFRC project/programme management and related monitoring and evaluation (M&E). References to
“OECD/DAC 2002” refer to the Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management (2002)
from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee.
• Accountability. The obligation to demon-
strate to stakeholders to what extent results
have been achieved according to established
plans. This definition guides our accountability
principles as set out in Strategy 2020: explicit
standard setting; pen monitoring and report-
ing; transparent information sharing; mean-
ingful beneficiary participation; effective and
efficient use of resources; systems for learning
and responding to concerns and complaints.
• Accuracy. The extent that collected data meas-
ures what they are intended to measure.
• Activities. As a term used in the hierarchy of
objectives for the IFRC logframe, activities re-
fers to the collection of tasks to be carried out
in order to achieve an output.
• Actual. As a term used in IFRC indicator perfor-
mance measurement, it is the actual measure-
ment of an indicator for the period reporting on
indicator performance.
• Appraisal. An overall assessment of the rele-
vance, feasibility and potential sustainability of
a development intervention prior to a decision
of funding (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Appropriateness. The extent to which an inter-
vention is tailored to local needs and context,
and complements other interventions from
other actors. It includes how well the interven-
tion takes into account the economic, social,
political and environmental context, therefore
contributing to ownership, accountability and
cost-effectiveness.
• Assessment. The systematic collection, review
and use of information about projects/pro-
grammes undertaken for the purpose of im-
proving learning and implementation. “Assess-
ment” is a broad term, and can include initial
assessments, evaluations, reviews, etc.
• Assumption. As a term used in the IFRC log-
frame, it refers to a condition that needs to be
met for the successful achievement of objec-
tives. Assumptions describe risks that need to
be avoided by restating them as positive con-
ditions that need to hold. For instance, the
risk, “The political and security situation gets
worse,” can be restated as an assumption: “The
political and security situation remains stable.”
An assumption should restate a risk that is
possible, but not certain to happen, and there-
fore should be identified and monitored.
• Attribution.The degree an observed or measured
change can be ascribed (attributed) to a specific
intervention versus other factors (causes).
• Audit. An assessment to verify compliance
with established rules, regulations, procedures
or mandates. An audit can be distinguished
from an evaluation in that emphasis is on as-
surance and compliance with requirements,
rather than a judgement of worth.
• Baseline. A point of reference prior an interven-
tion against which progress can later be meas-
ured and compared. A baseline study is an anal-
ysis or study describing the initial conditions
(appropriate indicators) before the start of a pro-
ject/programme for comparison at a later date.
Annexes
33 Note that this Glossary is also separately available at the IFRC’s M&E web page – www.ifrc.org/MandE.

78
• Benchmark. A reference point or standard
against which progress or achievements may
be compared.
• Beneficiaries. The individuals, groups or or-
ganizations, whether targeted or not, that ben-
efit directly or indirectly from an intervention
(project/programme) (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Beneficiary monitoring. Tracks beneficiary
perceptions of a project/programme – includes
beneficiary satisfaction or complaints with the
project/programme, including their participa-
tion, treatment, access to resources and their
overall experience of change.
• Bias. Occurs when the accuracy and precision
of a measurement is threatened by the experi-
ence, perceptions and assumptions of the re-
searcher, or by the tools and approaches used
for measurement and analysis. Selection bias
results from the poor selection of the sample
population to measure/study, so that the peo-
ple, place or time period measured is not repre-
sentative of the larger population or condition
being studied. Measurement bias results from
poor data measurement – either due to a fault
in the data measurement instrument or the
data collector. Analytical bias results from the
poor analysis of collected data.
• Cluster/Sector evaluation. Focuses on a set
of related activities, projects or programmes,
typically across sites and implemented by mul-
tiple organizations (e.g. National Societies, the
United Nations, NGOs).
• Compliance monitoring. Checks compliance with
donor regulations and expected results, grant and
contract requirements, local governmental regu-
lations and laws, and ethical standards.
• Context (situation) monitoring. Tracks the set-
ting in which a project/programme operates,
especially as it affects identified risks and as-
sumptions, but also any unexpected consid-
erations that may arise. It includes the field, as
well as the larger political, institutional, fund-
ing and policy context that affect the project/
programme.
• Contingency costs. Refer to unexpected costs
that may arise during project/programme im-
plementation.
• Cost-benefit/Benefit-cost analysis. Analysis
that compares project/programme costs (typi-
cally in monetary terms) to all of its effects and
impacts, both positive and negative.
• Coverage. The extent population groups are
included in or excluded from an intervention,
and the differential impact on these groups.
• Data management. Refers to the processes
and systems for how a project/programme will
systematically and reliable store, manage and
access M&E data.
• Direct recipients. Countable recipients of services
from a Federation provider at the delivery point.
• Effectiveness. The extent to which an inter-
vention has or is likely to achieve its intended,
immediate results.
• Efficiency. The extent to which results have
been delivered in the least costly manner pos-
sible – a measure of how economically resourc-
es/inputs (funds, expertise, time, etc.) are con-
verted to results (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Endline. A measure made at the completion of
a project/programme (usually as part of its fi-
nal evaluation), to compare with baseline con-
ditions and assess change.
• Evaluation. An assessment that identifies, re-
flects upon and judges the worth of the effects
of what has been done. “An assessment, as sys-
tematic and objective as possible, of an ongoing
or completed project, programme or policy, its
design, implementation and results. The aim
is to determine the relevance and fulfilment of
objectives, developmental efficiency, effective-
ness, impact and sustainability. An evaluation
should provide information that is credible and
useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons
learned into the decision-making process of
both recipients and donors.” (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Ex-post evaluations. Conducted some time af-
ter implementation to assess long-term impact
and sustainability.
• External or independent evaluation. Conduct-
ed by evaluator(s) outside of the implementing
project/programme team, lending it a degree of
objectivity and often technical expertise.

79
• Final evaluation. A summative evaluation
conducted (often externally) at the completion
of project/programme implementation to as-
sess how well the project/programme achieved
its intended objectives.
• Financial monitoring. Tracks and accounts for
costs by input and activity within predefined
categories of expenditure.
• Formative evaluations. Occurs during project/
programme implementation to improve per-
formance and assess compliance.
• Generalizability. The extent to which findings
can be assumed to be true for the entire target
population, rather than just the sample popu-
lation under study.
• Goal. As a term used in the hierarchy of objec-
tives for the IFRC logframe, a goal refers to the
long-term result that an intervention seeks to
achieve (even if it may be beyond the scope of
an individual project/programme to achieve
on its own – e.g. a nutritional programme may
contribute to the goal of community health,
while other programmes, such as a malaria
prevention programme, also contributes to
community health).
• Host National Society (sometimes called an
Operational National Society or ONS). The
National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society in
the country in which an intervention (project/
programme) is implemented.
• Impact. The positive and negative, primary
and secondary long-term effects produced by
an intervention, directly or indirectly, intended
or intended (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Impact evaluation. Focuses on the effect of a
project/programme, rather than on its manage-
ment and delivery. Therefore, they typically oc-
cur after project/programme completion dur-
ing a final evaluation or an ex-post evaluation.
• Independent evaluation. See“external evaluation”.
• Indicator. As a term used in the IFRC logframe,
an indicator is a unit of measurement that
helps determine what progress is being made
towards the achievement of an intended result
(objective).
• Indicator tracking table (ITT). A data man-
agement tool for recording and monitoring
indicator performance (targets, actual perfor-
mance and percentage of target achieved) to
inform project/programme implementation
and management.
• Indirect recipients. Recipients that cannot be
directly counted because they receive services
apart from the provider and the delivery point.
• Information dissemination. Refers to how in-
formation (reports) is distributed to users.
• Inputs. As a term used in the hierarchy of ob-
jectives for the IFRC logframe, inputs refer to
the financial, human and material resources
needed to carry out activities.
• Internal or self-evaluation. Conducted by
those responsible for implementing a project/
programme, typically being more participatory
and reinforcing ownership and understanding
among the project/programme team.
• Joint evaluation. Conducted collaboratively by
more than one implementing partner, and can
help build consensus at different levels, cred-
ibility and joint support.
• Logical framework (logframe). A table (matrix)
summarizing a project/programme’s opera-
tional design, including: the logical sequence
of objectives to achieve the project/pro-
gramme’s intended results (activities,outputs,
outcomes and goal), the indicators and means
of verification to measure these objectives,
and any key assumptions.
• M&E plan. A table that builds upon a project/
programme’s logframe to detail key M&E re-
quirements for each indicator and assump-
tion. Table columns typically summarize key
indicator (measurement) information, includ-
ing: a detailed definition of the data, its sourc-
es, the methods and timing of its collection,
the people responsible, and the intended audi-
ence and use of the data.
• Meta-evaluation. Used to assess the evalu-
ation process itself, such as: an inventory of
evaluations to inform the selection of future
evaluations; the synthesis of evaluation re-
sults; checking compliance with evaluation

80
policy and good practices; assessing how well
evaluations are disseminated and utilized for
organizational learning and change, etc.
• Midterm evaluation. A formative evaluation
that occurs midway through implementation.
• Monitoring. The routine collection and analy-
sis of information to track progress against set
plans and check compliance to established
standards. It helps identify trends and pat-
terns, adapt strategies and inform decisions for
project/programme management.
• National Society paid staff. People who work
with a National Society for a minimum of three
months and are remunerated.
• Objective. As a term used in the IFRC logframe,
objectives refer to the terms used in the left
column of the logframe summarizing the key
results (theory of change) that a project/pro-
gramme seeks to achieve: inputs, activities,
outputs, outcomes and goal.
• Organizational monitoring. Tracks the sus-
tainability, institutional development and ca-
pacity building in the project/programme and
with its partners.
• Outcome. As a term used in the hierarchy of
objectives for the IFRC logframe, outcomes
refer to the primary results that lead to the
achievement of the goal (most commonly in
terms of the knowledge, attitudes or practices
of the target group).
• Output. As a term used in the hierarchy of ob-
jectives for the IFRC logframe, outputs are the
tangible products, goods and services and oth-
er immediate results that lead to the achieve-
ment of outcomes.
• Participating National Society (PNS). A
National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society
that assists an intervention (project/pro-
gramme) implemented in the country of a
Host National Society (HNS).
• Participatory evaluations. Conducted with the
beneficiaries and other key stakeholders, and
can be empowering, building their capacity,
ownership and support.
• People reached. Direct and indirect recipients
and people covered by the IFRC’s services, sep-
arated by service areas.
• Precision. The extent that data measurement
can be repeated accurately and consistently
over time and by different people.
• Primary data. Data is collected directly by the
project/programme team or specifically commis-
sioned to be collected for the project/programme.
• Problem analysis. Used to get an idea of the
main problems and their causes, focusing on
cause-effect relationships (often conducted
with a problem tree).
• Process (activity) monitoring. Tracks the use of
inputs and resources, the progress of activities
and the delivery of outputs. It examines how
activities are delivered – the efficiency in time
and resources.
• Programme. A set of coordinated projects im-
plemented to meet specific objectives within
defined time, cost and performance parame-
ters. Programmes aimed at achieving a com-
mon goal are grouped under a common entity
(country plan, operation, alliance, etc).
• Project. A set of coordinated activities imple-
mented to meet specific objectives within de-
fined time, cost and performance parameters.
Projects aimed at achieving a common goal
form a programme.
• Qualitative data/methods. Analyses and ex-
plains what is being studied with words (doc-
umented observations, representative case
descriptions, perceptions, opinions of value,
etc). Qualitative methods use semi-structured
techniques (e.g. observations and interviews)
to provide in-depth understanding of attitudes,
beliefs, motives and behaviours. They tend to
be more participatory and reflective in practice.
• Quantitative data/methods. Measures and ex-
plains what is being studied with numbers (e.g.
counts, ratios, percentages, proportions, aver-
age scores, etc). Quantitative methods tend to
use structured approaches (e.g. coded respons-
es to surveys) that provide precise data that
can be statistically analysed and replicated
(copied) for comparison.

81
• Real-time evaluations (RTEs). These are under-
taken during project/programme implementa-
tion, typically during an emergency operation,
to provide immediate feedback for modifica-
tions to improve ongoing implementation.
• Relative. The extent to which an intervention
is suited to the priorities of the target group (i.e.
local population and donor). It also considers
other approaches that may have been better
suited to address the identified needs.
• Reporting. The process of providing analysed
data as information for key stakeholders to
use, i.e. for project/programme management,
donor accountability, advocacy, etc. Inter-
nal reporting is conducted to actual project/
programme implementation; it plays a more
crucial role in lesson learning to facilitate
decision-making – and, ultimately, what can
be extracted and reported externally. External
reporting is conducted to inform stakeholders
outside the project/programme team and im-
plementing organization; this is important for
accountability.
• Results. The effects of an intervention (project/
programme), which can be intended or unin-
tended, positive or negative. In the IFRC log-
frame, the three highest levels of results are
outputs, outcomes and goal.
• Results-based management (RBM). An ap-
proach to project/programme management
based on clearly defined results and the meth-
odologies and tools to measure and achieve
them.
• Results monitoring. Tracks the effects and
impacts – determines any progress towards in-
tended results (objectives) and whether there
may be any unintended impact (positive or
negative).
• Review. A structured opportunity for reflection
to identify key issues and concerns, and make
informed decisions for effective project/pro-
gramme implementation.
• Risk analysis. An analysis or an assessment
of factors (called assumptions in the logframe)
that affect the successful achievement of an
intervention’s objectives. A detailed examina-
tion of the potential unwanted and negative
consequences to human life, health, property
or the environment posed by development in-
terventions (OECD/DAC 2002).
• Sample. A subset of a whole population se-
lected to study and draw conclusions about
the population as a whole. Sampling (the pro-
cess of selecting a sample) is a critical aspect
of planning the collection of primary data.
Random (probability) samples are quantita-
tively determined and use statistics to make
more precise generalizations about the larger
population. Purposeful (non-random) samples
are qualitatively determined and do not use
statistics; they often involve smaller, targeted
samples of the population and are less statis-
tically reliable for generalizations about the
larger population.
• Sample frame. The list of every member of the
population from which a sample is to be taken
(e.g. the communities or categories of people –
women, children, refugees, etc).
• Secondary data. Data that is not directly col-
lected by and for the project/programme but
which can nevertheless meet project/pro-
gramme information needs.
• Secretariat paid staff. People who work with
the secretariat for a minimum of three months
and are remunerated.
• Source. The origin (i.e. people or documents)
identified as the subject of inquiry for monitor-
ing or evaluation.
• Stakeholder. A person or group of people with
a direct or indirect role or interest in the objec-
tives and implementation of an intervention
(project/programme) and/or its evaluation.
• Stakeholder complaints and feedback analy-
sis. A means for stakeholders to provide com-
ment and voice complaints and feedback about
services delivered.
• Summative evaluation. Occurs at the end of
project/programme implementation to assess
its effectiveness and impact.
• Sustainability. The degree to which the ben-
efits of an intervention are likely to contin-
ue once donor input has been withdrawn. It

82
includes environmental, institutional and fi-
nancial sustainability.
• SWOT analysis. Conducted to assess the
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
of an organization, group or people (i.e. commu-
nity), or an intervention (project/programme).
• Target. As a term used in IFRC indicator track-
ing, a target is the intended measure (quantity)
set to achieve an indicator.
• Target group/population. The specific individ-
uals or organizations for whose benefit an in-
tervention (project/programme) is undertaken.
• Terms of reference (ToR). Written document
presenting the purpose and scope of the evalu-
ation, the methods to be used, the standard
against which performance is to be assessed
or analyses are to be conducted, the resources
and time allocated and reporting requirements
(OECD/DAC 2002).
• Thematic evaluation. Focuses on one theme,
such as gender or environment, typically
across a number of projects, programmes or
the whole organization.
• Total people covered. People that are targeted
by a programme for which the benefit is not
immediate but from which the target popula-
tion can benefit if an adverse event occurs (e.g.
early warning system).
• Triangulation. The process of using differ-
ent sources and/or methods for data collec-
tion. Combining different sources and methods
(mixed methods) helps to reduce bias and cross-
check data to better ensure it is valid, reliable
and complete.
• Validity. As a term used in evaluation methodol-
ogy, it refers to the extent to which data collec-
tion strategies and instruments measure what
they intend to measure. Internal validity refers to
the accuracy of the data in reflecting the reality
of the programme, while external validity refers
to the generalizability of study results to other
groups, settings, treatments and outcomes.
• Variance. As a term used in IFRC indicator per-
formance measurement, it is the difference be-
tween identified targets and actual results for
the indicator – the percentage of target reached
(actual/target). For example, if ten communi-
ties were targeted to participate in a commu-
nity assessment but the actual communities
conducting an assessment were only five, the
variance would be 50 per cent (five communi-
ties/ten communities = 50 per cent).
• Volunteering. An activity that is motivated by
the free will of the person volunteering, and
not by a desire for material or financial gain or
by external social, economic or political pres-
sure; intended to benefit vulnerable people and
their communities in accordance with the Fun-
damental Principles of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent; organized by recognized representa-
tives of a National Red Cross or Red Crescent
Society.
• Volunteers. People that have volunteered at
least four hours during the annual reporting
perioed with Red Cross Red Crescent.

83
Annex 2 M&E resources
Annex 2: M&E resources
Cited materials in this guide are footnoted on the page on which they are cited. This annex lists additional re-
sources to assist with M&E. It is far from extensive as there is an abundance of M&E resources, which a quick
search on the internet can demonstrate. Instead, the following list is a selection of key resources, from which ad-
ditional resources can be sought. Only open-access resources available on the internet have been listed with their
internet address (if this address does not work in the future as it has changed, we suggest you search the publica-
tion title and author using an internet search engine).
IFRC M&E web page – www.ifrc.org/MandE
Maintained by the IFRC secretariat’s planning and evaluation department (PED), this web page on the IFRC’s
public web site includes:
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Framework for Evaluation identifying the international criteria and standard, including
ethical, by which IFRC secretariat-funded evaluations are to be planned, managed, conducted and utilized.
›› IFRC Evaluation database – a internet archive of completed IFRC secretariat-funded evaluations and related
studies (i.e. baselines) for transparent accountability, as well as strategic planning and lesson sharing.
›› IFRC. 2010. IFRC Project/Programme Planning Guidance Manual Guidance introducing analysis and a logical
framework model for results-based project management.
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Monitoring and Evaluation Guide to promote a common understanding and reliable prac-
tice of M&E for IFRC projects/programmes.
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Guide to Stakeholder Complaints and Feedback to guide accountable and transparent sys-
tems for stakeholders to provide comment and voice complaints about IFRC work.
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC PMER Capacity Assessment Tool
›› IFRC Glossary of Key PMER Terms
›› Key IFRC PMER Templates: Logical framework (“logframe”) template; Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Table;
Indicator Tracking Table (ITT); Project/Programme Management Report template.
›› IFRC-PMER classroom and online training – a complete package of skills-based training materials for
National Society and IFRC staff and volunteers in planning, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (PMER),
including online trainings.
›› Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1989. Sample Size Calculation Sheet (from Statistical Methods, Eighth
Edition. Iowa State University Press).
›› White, Graham and Wiles, Peter. 2008. Monitoring Templates for Humanitarian Organizations. Commis-
sioned by the European Commission Director-General for Humanitarian AID (DG ECHO).
IFRC Federation-Wide Reporting System (FWRS) web page – https://fednet.ifrc.org/en/
resources-and-services/ns-development/performance-development/federation-wide-reporting-system/ (accessible
only to IFRC members registered with FedNet).
Provides FWRS guidance and resources to monitor and report on key data from National Societies and the
secretariat on regular basis. The above internet/web site link needs to be updated. The correct web site is expected
shortly.
M&E resource web sites
There is a variety of web sites with a comprehensive selection of M&E resources, including guides, tools, trainings,
links to other M&E web sites, international associations and organizations, internet discussion groups, etc. The
following list is a sampling:
›› CARE Program Quality Digital Library. 2011. http://pqdl.care.org/default.aspx
›› Catholic Relief Services Technical Resources – M&E. 2011. http://www.crsprogramquality.org/m-and-e/

84
›› The Evaluation Center. 2011. Evaluation Checklists. Western Michigan University. http://www.wmich.edu/
evalctr/checklists
›› Evaluation Portal. 2011. /www.evaluation.lars-balzer.name/
›› EvaluationWiki.org. 2011. A public compendium of user-defined terms and other M&E information.
www.evaluationwiki.org
›› IFRC Monitoring and Evaluation web page. 2011. www.ifrc.org/MandE
›› InterAction M&E web site. 2011. www.interaction.org/monitoring-evaluation
›› International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation (IOCE). 2011. www.internationalevaluation.com/
events/index.shtml
›› INTRAC Resources. 2011. International NGO Training and Research Center. www.intrac.org/resources.php
›› MandE News web site: http://mande.co.uk/. [This is one of the largest internet resources for M&E, including
a Training Forum: www.mande.co.uk/emaillists.htm].
›› MEASURE (Measure and Evaluation to Assess and Use Results Evaluation). 2008. http://www.cpc.unc.edu/
measure. [Funded by USAID, the MEASURE framework offers M&E publications, tools, trainings and other
resources, including a Population, Health and Environmental M&E Training Tool Kit, www.cpc.unc.edu/
measure/phe-training]
›› National Science Foundation (NSF). 2011. User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations. http://
www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf97153/start.htm [Comprehensive, online resource.]
›› OECD/DAC Evaluation of Development Programs web site. 2011. www.oecd.org/department/0,3355,
en_2649_34435_1_1_1_1_1,00.html. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development/Develop-
ment Assistance Committee.
›› Participatory Planning Monitoring & Evaluation (PPM&E) Resource Portal. 2008. http://portals.wdi.wur.nl/
ppme/index.php?Home. [Contains multiple resources for M&E planning.]
›› Public Health Agency of Canada. 2011. Program Evaluation Tool Kit. www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/php-psp/toolkit-
eng.php
›› Resources for Methods in Evaluation and Social Research web site. 2011. http://gsociology.icaap.org/methods/, in-
cluding a series of user-friendly beginner guides, http://gsociology.icaap.org/methods/BasicguidesHandouts.html.
›› UNDP Evaluation web site: 2011. United Nations Development Programme. http://www.undp.org/eo/
›› UNEG Evaluation Resources web site. 2011. www.uneval.org/evaluationresource/index.jsp?ret=true. United
Nations Evaluation Group.
›› UNICEF Web site & External Links for Evaluation and Lessons Learned. 2011. United Nations International
Children’s Emergency Fund. www.unicef.org/evaluation/index_18077.html
›› Wageningen PPM&E Resource Portal. 2011. Participator Planning Monitoring & Evaluation. http://portals.
wi.wur.nl/ppme/?PPM%26E_in_projects_and_programs
›› World Bank. 2011. The Nuts & Bolts of M&E Systems. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/
EXTPOVERTY/0,,contentMDK:22632898~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:336992,00.html
Overall M&E guides
›› ALNAP (Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian). 2006. Evaluation
Humanitarian Action Using OECD/DAC Criteria. www.alnap.org/pool/files/eha_2006.pdf
›› American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services. RS. 2008. M&E Training and Capacity-Building Modules,
Washington, DC, and Baltimore, MD. http://pqpublications.squarespace.com/publications/2011/1/18/me-
training-and-capacity-building-modules.html
›› Bamberger, Michael, Rugh, Jim, and Mabry, Linda. 2006. RealWorld Evaluation: Working Under Budget, Time,
Data and Political Constraints. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications. www.realworldevalu-
ation.org/RealWorld_Evaluation_resour.html

85
›› Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. Monitoring and Evaluation Planning. M&E Training and Capacity-Building Modules
American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Washington, DC, and Baltimore, MD. http://pqpub-
lications.squarespace.com/storage/pubs/me/MEmodule_planning.pdf
›› DfID (Department for International Development). 2006. Monitoring and Evaluation: A Guide for DfID-con-
tracted Research Programmes. www.dfid.gov.uk/research/me-guide-contracted-research.pdf
›› European Commission. 2004. Aid Delivery Methods – Volume 1, Project Cycle Management Guidelines. http://
ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/49a_en.htm
›› IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development). 2009. Evaluation Manual: Methodology and Pro-
cesses. www.ifad.org/evaluation/process_methodology/doc/manual.pdf
›› IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development). 2002. A Guide for Project M&E. IFAD, Rome. http://
www.ifad.org/evaluation/guide/toc.htm
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Monitoring and Evaluation Guide Guidance. www.ifrc.org/MandE
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Framework for Evaluation. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
(IFRC). www.ifrc.org/MandE
›› Local Livelihoods. 2009. Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation. http://www.locallivelihoods.com/Docu-
ments/RBPME%20Toolkit.pdf
›› OECD/DAC (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development/Development Assistance Commit-
tee). 2011. DAC Network on Development Evaluation web site: http://www.oecd.org/document/35/0,3343,
en_21571361_34047972_31779555_1_1_1_1,00.html
›› UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2009. Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating
for Development Results. www.undp.org/evaluation/handbook/documents/english/pme-handbook.pdf
›› USAID (United States Agency for International Development). 2007. M&E Fundamentals – A Self-Guided
Minicourse. USAID, Washington, DC. www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/publications/pdf/ms-07-20.pdf
›› WFP (United Nations’ World Food Programme). 2011. Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines. http://www.
wfp.org/content/monitoring-and-evaluation-guidelines
›› The World Bank Group, Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). 2008. International Program for Development
Evaluation Training. http://www.worldbank.org/oed/ipdet/modules.html. [Course modules provide an
overview of key M&E concepts and practices.]
Project/programme design (logframes)
›› Caldwell, Richard. 2002. Project Design Handbook. Atlanta: CARE International. http://www.ewb-interna-
tional.org/pdf/CARE%20Project%20Design%20Handbook.pdf. [Comprehensive overview of project design
as it relates to the overall M&E system.]
›› Danida. 1996. Logical Framework Approach: A Flexible Tool for Participatory Development. http://amg.um.dk/
en/menu/TechnicalGuidelines/LogicalFrameworkApproach
›› IFRC. 2010. IFRC Project/Programme Planning Guidance Manual. www.ifrc.org/MandE
›› Rugh, Jim. 2008. The Rosetta Stone of Logical Frameworks. Compiled by Jim Rugh for CARE International and
InterAction’s Evaluation Interest Group. http://www.mande.co.uk/docs/Rosettastone.doc. [Helpful sum-
mary of different logframe terminology used by international organizations.]
Data collection and analysis methods
›› CARE. 2001. Guidelines to CARE Malawi for the Design of Future Baseline and Evaluation Studies. http://pqdl.
care.org/Practice/Baseline%20Guidelines.pdf
›› Cody, Ronald. 2011. Data Cleaning 101. Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. NJ. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/
stat/sas/library/nesug99/ss123.pdf
›› Davies, Rich and Dart, Jess. 2005. The “Most Significant Change” (MSC) Technique. http://www.mande.co.uk/
docs/MSCGuide.pdf

86
›› Emergency Capacity Building Project. 2007. The Good Enough Guide: Impact Measurement and Accountability
in Emergencies. http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/resources/downloads/Good_Enough_Guide.pdf
›› Harvey, Jen. 1998. Evaluation Cookbook. http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/cookbook/cookbook.pdf
›› IHSN. 2011. Catalog of Survey Questionnaires. http://www.ihsn.org/home/index.php?q=country_questionnaires
›› Mack, Natasha, Woodsong, Cynthia, MacQueen, Kathleen M, Guest, Greg and Namey, Emily. 2005. Qualita-
tive Research Methods. Family Health International (FHI) and the Agency for International Development
(USAID). http://www.fhi.org/en/rh/pubs/booksreports/qrm_datacoll.htm
›› Magnani, Robert. 1997. Sample Guide. Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance (FANTA). Academy for Edu-
cational Development. Washington, DC. http://www.fantaproject.org/downloads/pdfs/sampling.pdf
›› Online Sample Calculators. In addition to the Sample Size Calculation Sheet available on the IFRC’s M&E web
site (www.ifrc.org/MandE), there are numerous online sample calculators, of which the following are not
exhaustive: Creative Research Systems: www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm; Custom Insight, www.cus-
tominsight.com/articles/random-sample-calculator.asp; Raosoft; www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
›› Scheuren, Fritz. 2004. What is a Survey? http://www.whatisasurvey.info/
›› Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1989. Sample Size Calculation Sheet. (from Statistical Methods, Eighth Edition.
Iowa State University Press.) Also listed and available above under the IFRC M&E web page, www.ifrc.org/MandE.
›› University of Florida IFAS Extension. 2011. Determining Sample Size. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pd006
›› WFP (United Nations’ World Food Programme). 2011. Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines – How to Plan a
Baseline Study. http://www.wfp.org/content/monitoring-and-evaluation-guidelines
›› WFP (United Nations’ World Food Programme). 2011. Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines – How to consoli-
date, process and analyse qualitative and quantitative data. http://www.wfp.org/content/monitoring-and-
evaluation-guidelines.
›› World Bank. 2004. Reconstructing Baseline Data for Impact Evaluation and Results Measurement. http://site
resources.worldbank.org/INTPOVERTY/Resources/335642-1276521901256/premnoteME4.pdf
Community health M&E resources
›› The Global Fund. 2009. Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit. http://www.theglobalfund.org/documents/me/
M_E_Toolkit.pdf
›› IFRC. 2011. Community Based Health and First Aid (CBHFA) PMER Toolkit. International Federation of Red
Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/health/community-based-
health/ [Comprehensive toolkit of resources for planning, monitoring, evaluating and reporting on CBHFA
projects/programmes.]
›› Global HIV M&E Information Portal. 2011. www.globalhivmeinfo.org
›› MEASURE. 2008. Measure and Evaluation to Assess and Use Results Evaluation web site: http://www.cpc.unc.
edu/measure. [Funded by USAID, the MEASURE framework offers M&E publications, tools, trainings, and
other resources to support improvement of global health and well-being.]
›› UNAIDS. 2002. Monitoring and Evaluation Operations Manual. Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/
AIDS. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTHIVAIDS/Resources/375798-1098987393985/M&EManual.pdf
›› WHO, World Bank, USAID. 2009. Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation of Human Resources for Health.
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241547703_eng.pdf
Disaster management M&E resources
›› IFRC. 2007. Disaster Response and Contingency Planning Guide. www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/disasters/
disaster-response-en.pdf
›› ICRC & IFRC. 2008. Guidelines for Assessment in Emergencies. www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/disasters/
guidelines/guidelines-for-emergency-en.pdf

87
›› IFRC. 2011. Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment (VCA). http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/disaster-man-
agement/preparing-for-disaster/disaster-preparedness-tools/disaster-preparedness-tools/
Environmental conservation M&E resources
›› Benfield Hazard Research Center, University College London, and CARE International. 2003. Guidelines for
Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment in Disasters. http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assis-
tance/ffp/rea_guidelines.pdf
›› World Wildlife Fund (WWF). 2009. Green Recovery and Reconstruction: Training Toolkit for Humanitarian Aid.
[Module 2 for project design, monitoring and evaluation.] http://green-recovery.org/
International principles and standards related to M&E
›› ALNAP. 2011. Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action. http://
www.alnap.org/resources.aspx
›› HAP International. 2011. Humanitarian Accountability Partnership. http://www.hapinternational.org/.
›› IFRC. 2011. IFRC Fundamental Principles and Values. Geneva. http://www.ifrc.org/en/who-we-are/vision-
and-mission/principles-and-values/
›› IFRC/ICRC. 2011. Code of Conduct for The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in
Disaster Relief. www.ifrc.org/en/publications-and-reports/code-of-conduct/
›› The Cluster Approach to Humanitarian Response. 2011. Humanitarian Reform, http://www.humanitarian-
reform.org/. UN-OCHA, http://www.ochaopt.org/clusters.aspx?id=2. Conceptual diagram http://business.
un.org/en/assets/39c87a78-fec9-402e-a434-2c355f24e4f4.pdf
›› The Sphere Project. 2011. http://www.sphereproject.org/
Gender M&E resources
›› Australian Red Cross. 2011. Organizational Gender Assessment Tool. http://redcross.org.au/58081FF6952F4F
0F91DF13F3404FCBED.htm
›› World Bank. 2011. Gender in Monitoring and Evaluation in Rural Development: A Toolkit. Gender and Rural
Development Group of the World Bank. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTARD/0,,
contentMDK:20438885~isCURL:Y~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:336682,00.html
Shelter M&E resources
›› IFRC. 2010. Owner-Driven Housing Reconstruction Guidelines. http://sheltercentre.org/library/owner-driven-
housing-reconstruction-guidelines
›› OneResponse. 2011. IASC Gender Marker. http://oneresponse.info/crosscutting/gender/Pages/The%20IASC%20
Gender%20Marker.aspx
Water and sanitation M&E resources
›› IFRC-GWSI. 2009. Global Water and Sanitation Initiative. Standard Evaluation Tools. IFRC Global Water &
Sanitation Initiative (GWSI). http://www.ifrc.org/what/health/water/gwsi.asp
›› IFRC-GWSI. 2011. Global Water and Sanitation Initiative Checklist: A Project Planning Tool. International Fed-
eration of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). http://www.ifrc.org/what/health/water/gwsi.asp
›› IFRC-GWSI. 2011. Global Water and Sanitation Initiative Basic Logical Framework. International Federation of
Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). http://www.ifrc.org/what/health/water/gwsi.asp
›› IFRC-GWSI. 2011. Red Cross and Red Crescent PHAST Baseline Survey. International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). http://www.ifrc.org/what/health/water/gwsi.asp

88
Annex 3: Factors affecting the quality
of M&E information
Factors affecting the quality of M&E information*
ÎÎ Accuracy, validity: does the information show the true situation?
ÎÎ Relevance: is the information relevant to user interests?
ÎÎ Timeliness: is the information available in time to make necessary decisions?
ÎÎ Credibility: is the information believable?
ÎÎ Attribution: are results due to the project or to something else?
ÎÎ Significance: is the information important?
ÎÎ Representativeness: does the information represent only the target group or the wider population also?
ÎÎ Spatial - Issues of comfort and ease determine monitoring sites
ÎÎ Project - The assessor is drawn toward sites where contacts and information is readily available and may
have been assessed before by many others.
ÎÎ Person - Key informants tend to be those who are in a high position and have the ability to communicate.
ÎÎ Season - Assessments are conducted during periods of pleasant weather, or areas cut off by bad weather
are neglected in analysis and many typical problems go unnoticed.
ÎÎ Diplomatic - Selectivity in projects shown to the assessor for diplomatic reasons.
ÎÎ Professional - Assessors are too specialized and miss linkages between processes.
ÎÎ Conflict - Assessors go only to areas of cease-fire and relative safety.
ÎÎ Political - Informants present information that is skewed toward their political agenda; assessors look for
information that fits their political agenda.
ÎÎ Cultural - Incorrect assumptions are based on one’s own cultural norms; assessors do not understand
the cultural practices of the affected populations.
ÎÎ Class/ethnic - Needs and resources of different groups are not included in the assessment.

89
Annex 3 Factors affecting the quality of M&E information
Factors affecting the quality of M&E information*
ÎÎ Interviewer or investigator - Tendency to concentrate on information that confirms preconceived no-
tions and hypotheses, causing one to seek consistency too early and overlook evidence inconsistent with
earlier findings; partiality to the opinions of elite key informants.
ÎÎ Key informant - Biases of key informants carried into assessment results.
ÎÎ Gender - Male monitors may only speak to men; young men may be omitted.
ÎÎ Mandate or specialty - Agencies assess areas of their competency without an inter-disciplinary or inter-
agency approach.
ÎÎ Time of day or schedule bias - The assessment is conducted at a time of day when certain segments
of the population may be over- or under-represented.
ÎÎ Sampling - Respondents are not representative of the population.
* Adopted from White, Graham and Wiles, Peter. 2008. Monitoring Templates for Humanitarian Organizations. Commissioned by the European
Commission Director-General for Humanitarian Aid (DG ECHO): p. 30.

90
Annex 4: Checklist for the six key M&E steps 34
CHECKLIST – six key steps for project/programme M&E
Step 1 Checklist: Identify the purpose and scope of the M&E system
Activities
†† Review the project/programme’s operational design
(logframe)
†† Identify key stakeholder informational needs and
expectations
†† Identify any M&E requirements
†† Scope major M&E events and functions
Key tools
†† Refer to the project/programme logframe
(see Annex 5 for IFRC logframe format)
†† M&E stakeholder assessment table
(Annex 6)
†† M&E activity planning table (Annex 7)
Step 2 Checklist: Plan for data collection and management
Activities
†† Develop an M&E plan table
†† Assess the availability of secondary data
†† Determine the balance of quantitative and qualitative data
†† Triangulate data collection sources and methods
†† Determine sampling requirements
†† Prepare for any surveys
†† Prepare specific data collection methods/tools
†† Establish stakeholder complaints and feedback
mechanisms
†† Establish project/programme staff/volunteer review
mechanisms
†† Plan for data management
†† Use an indicator tracking table (ITT)
†† Use a risk log (table)
Key tools
†† M&E plan table template and
instructions (Annex 8)
†† Key data collection methods and tools
(Annex 10)
†† Complaints form (Annex 11)
†† Complaints log (Annex 12)
†† Staff/volunteer performance
management template (Annex 13)
†† Individual time resourcing sheet
(Annex 14)
†† Project/programme team time resourcing
sheet (Annex 15)
†† Indicator tracking table (ITT)
examples and instructions (Annex 16)
†† Risk log (Annex 17)
Step 3 Checklist: Plan for data analysis
Activities
†† Develop a data analysis plan, identifying the:
1. Purpose of data analysis
2. Frequency of data analysis
3. Responsibility for data analysis
4. Process for data analysis
†† Follow the key data analysis stages:
1. Data preparation
2. Data analysis
3. Data validation
4. Data presentation
5. Recommendations and action
planning
34 Note that this checklist is also separately available at the IFRC’s M&E web page – www.ifrc.org/MandE.

91
Annex 4 Checklist for the six M&E steps
CHECKLIST – six key steps for project/programme M&E
Step 4 Checklist: Plan for information reporting and utilization
Activities
†† Anticipate and plan for reporting:
1. Needs/audience
2. Frequency
3. Formats
4. People responsible
†† Plan for information utilization:
1. Information dissemination
2. Decision-making and planning
Key Tools
†† Reporting schedule (Annex 18)
†† IFRC project/programme management
report - template and instructions
(Annex 19)
†† Decision log (Annex 20)
†† Action log (Annex 20)
†† Lessons learned log (Annex 20)
Step 5 Checklist: Plan for M&E human resources and capacity building
Activities
†† Assess the project/programme’s HR capacity for M&E
†† Determine the extent of local participation
†† Determine the extent of outside expertise
†† Define the roles and responsibilities for M&E
†† Plan to manage project/programme team’s M&E activities
†† Identify M&E capacity-building requirements and
opportunities
Key Tools
†† Example M&E job description
(Annex 21)
†† “Hiring M&E Staff” (Clara Hagens, 2008)
†† M&E training schedule (Annex 22)
Step 6 Checklist: Prepare the M&E budget
Activities
†† Itemize M&E budget needs
†† Incorporate M&E costs into the project/programme budget
†† Review any donor budget requirements and contributions
†† Plan for cost contingency

92
Annex 5: IFRC logframe – definition of terms 35
IFRC logical framework (logframe) – definition of terms
OBJECTIVES
(What we want to
achieve)
INDICATORS
(How to measure
change)
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
(Where/how to get
information)
ASSUMPTIONS
(What else to be
aware of)
Goal
The long-term results
that an intervention
seeks to achieve, which
may be contributed to
by factors outside the
intervention
Impact indicators
Quantitative and/or
qualitative criteria
that provide a simple
and reliable means to
measure achievement
or reflect changes
connected to the goal
How the information
on the indicator will be
collected (can include
who will collect it and
how often)
External conditions
necessary if the goal is
to contribute to the next
level of intervention
Outcomes 36
The primary result(s)
that an intervention
seeks to achieve, most
commonly in terms
of the knowledge,
attitudes or practices of
the target group
Outcome indicators
As above, connected to
the stated outcomes
As above External conditions
not under the
direct control of the
intervention necessary
if the outcome is to
contribute to reaching
intervention goal
Outputs
The tangible products,
goods and services
and other immediate
results that lead to
the achievement of
outcomes
Output indicators
the stated outputs
As above External factors not
under the direct control
of the intervention
which could restrict the
outputs leading to the
outcomes
Activities 37
The collection of tasks
to be carried out in
order to achieve the
outputs
Process indicators
the stated activities
As above External factors not
under the direct control
of the intervention
which could restrict
progress of activities
35 Note that a complete IFRC-recommended logframe template is available at the IFRC’s M&E web page – www.ifrc.org/MandE.
36 When there is more than one outcome in a project the outputs should be listed under each outcome – see the examples on the following pages.
37 Activities may often be included in a separate document (e.g. activity schedule/GANTT chart) for practical purposes.

93
Annex 6 Example M&E stakeholder assessment table
Annex 6: Example M&E stakeholder
assessment table*
Example M&E stakeholder assessment table
Who What Why When How (format) M&E Role/Function
Project
management
Project
reports
Decision-
making and
strategic
planning
Monthly Indicator tracking
table, quarterly
project reports,
annual strategic
reports
Manage M&E
system
Project staff Project
reports
Understand
decisions and
their role in
implementation
Monthly Weekly field
reports, indicator
tracking table
and quarterly
project reports
Collect monitoring
data – supervise
community
members in data
collection
Headquarters
and/or
secretariat
zone
Annual
project
information
Organizational
knowledge
sharing,
learning and
strategic
planning
Annual Federation-wide
reporting system
format
Review and
feedback on report
Donor Donor
progress
reports
Accountability
to stated
objectives
Quarterly Donor reporting
format based on
indicator tracking
table and
quarterly project
reports
Review and
feedback on report
Communities
(beneficiaries)
Community
monitoring
checklist
Accountability,
understanding
and ownership
Monthly Community
monitoring
checklist
Monthly collect and
report on project
data in checklist
Implementing
(bilateral)
partner
Project
reports
Accountability,
collaboration,
knowledge
sharing and
conserve
resources
Monthly Quarterly project
reports with
feedback form
Review and
supplement project
report narrative
with feedback/
input
Local partner Annual
project
information
Knowledge
sharing,
learning,
promotion and
support
Annual Format based on
indicator tracking
table and
quarterly project
reports
Review and
feedback on report
* Adopted from Siles, Rodolfo, 2004, “Project Management Information Systems”, which provides a more comprehensive discussion on the topic.

94
Example M&E stakeholder assessment table
Who What Why When How (format) M&E Role/Function
Local
authority
External
progress
reports
Accountability,
understanding
and support
Quarterly Format based on
indicator tracking
table and
quarterly project
reports
Review and
feedback on report
Government Donor/
external
progress
reports
Account-
ability, un-
derstanding,
promotion and
support
Annual Format based on
indicator tracking
table and
quarterly project
reports
Review and
feedback on report
Etc.
Example M&E stakeholder assessment table (continued)

95
Annex 7 Example M&E activity planning table
Annex 7: Example M&E activity planning table
Example M&E activity planning table*
M&E activities/events Timing/frequency Responsibilities Estimated budget
(Examples provided below)
Baseline survey
Endline survey
Midterm evaluation
Final evaluation
Project monitoring
Context monitoring
Beneficiary monitoring
Project/programme
management reports
Annual reports
Donor reports
M&E training
Etc.
* This table can be tailored to particular project M&E planning needs; different columns can be used or added, such as a column for capacity building or
training for any activity.

96
Annex 8: M&E plan table template
and instructions
“Project/programme name” M&E plan*
Indicator Indicator
definition
(and unit of
measurement)
Data
collection
methods/
sources
Frequency and
schedule
Responsibili-
ties
Information
use/audience
GOAL:
Indicator G.a
Assumption G.a
OUTCOME 1:
Indicator 1.a
Indicator 1.b
Assumption 1.a
OUTPUT 1.1:
Indicator 1.1a
Assumption 1.1a
OUTPUT 1.2:
Indicator 1.2a
Assumption 1.2a
OUTCOME 2:
Indicator 2.a
Assumption 2.a
OUTPUT 2.1:
Indicator 2.1a
Assumption 1.1a
OUTPUT 2.2:
Indicator 2.2a
Assumption 2.2a
* Continue adding objectives and indicators according to project/programme logframe.

97
Annex 8 M&E plan table template and instructions
M&E plan example
M&Eplanexample
IndicatorIndicatordefinition
(andunitofmeasurement)
Datacollection
methods/sources
Frequencyand
schedule
Person(s)
responsible
Information
use/audience
Example
Indicator
Outcome1.a:
Percentof
targetschools
thatsuccessfully
conductaminimum
ofonedisaster
drill(scenario)per
quarter
1. SchoolsreferstoK-12
schoolsinMatara
District.
2. Successdetermined
byunannounceddrill
throughearlywarning
system;responsetime
under20minutes;
schoolmembersreport
todesignatedarea
pertheSchoolCrisis
ResponsePlan;school
disasterresponseteam
(DRT)assemblesandis
properlyequipped.
3. Numerator:Numberof
schoolswithsuccessful
scenarioperquarter
4. Denominator:Total
numberoftargeted
schools
1. Pre-arrangedsite
visitstoobserve
disasterdrilland
completedisaster
drillchecklist.
Checklistneedsto
bedeveloped.
2. Schoolfocus
groupdiscussions
(teachers,
students,
administration).
Focusgroup
questionnaire
needstobe
developed.
1. Disasterdrill
checklistdata
collectedquarterly
2. Focusgroup
discussionevery
sixmonths
3. Begindata
collectionon
15/4/06
4. Disasterdrill
checklist
completedby
3/8/06
SchoolField
Officer(SFO):
ShanthaWarnera
1. Projectmonitoring
andlearningwith
SchoolDisaster
Committees
2. Quarterly
management
reportsfor
strategicplanning
toheadquarters
3. Impactevaluation
tojustify
interventionto
MinistryofDisaster
Relief,donors,etc.
4. Accountability
todonorsand
publicthrough
community
meetings,website
postingandlocal
newspaperreports
Assumption1.a:
Civilunrestdoes
notprevent
programme
implementationin
targetcommunities.
Civilunrestrefersto
theprevioushistoryof
“faction A”fightingwith
“factionB”.
In-fieldmonitoringby
programmeteamwith
communitypartners.
Mediamonitoringof
nationalnewspapers
andTV/radio
broadcasting.
Ongoingmonitoring
duringdurationof
programme.
Fieldmonitoring:
programmeteam.
Mediamonitoring:
programme
manager.
Monitorrisks
forinformed
implementationand
achievementofthe
projectobjective(s).

98
M&E plan purpose and compliance
• An M&E plan is a table that builds upon a project/programme’s logframe to de-
tail key M&E requirements for each indicator and assumption. It allows project/
programme staff at the field level to track progress towards specific targets
for better transparency and accountability within and outside the IFRC.
• This IFRC M&E plan is to be used for all secretariat-funded projects/programmes
at the field level, and is to inform other indicator planning formats within the
secretariat and the larger IFRC community as appropriate.
• The M&E plan should be completed during the planning stage of a project/pro-
gramme and by those who will be using it. This allows the project/programme
team to cross-check the logframe and indicators before project/programme
implementation (ensuring they are realistic to field realities and team ca-
pacities). Team involvement is essential because the M&E plan requires their
detailed knowledge of the project/programme context, and their involvement
reinforces their understanding of what data they are to collect and how they
will collect it.
• The IFRC M&E plan template and instructions can be accessed at the IFRC-PED
web site for M&E: www.ifrc.org/MandE.
M&E plan instructions
Drawing upon the above example, the following is an explanation of each
column in an M&E plan:
1. The indicator column provides an indicator statement of the precise infor-
mation needed to assess whether intended changes have occurred. Indica-
tors can be either quantitative (numeric) or qualitative (descriptive observa-
tions). Indicators are typically taken directly from the logframe, but should
be checked in the process to ensure they are SMART (specific, measurable,
achievable, relevant and time-bound).39
Often, the indicator may need to be
revised upon closer examination and according to field realities. If this is the
case, be sure any revisions are approved by key stakeholders, e.g. donors.
2. The definition column defines any key terms in the indicator that need
further detail for precise and reliable measurement. It should also explain
precisely how the indicator will be calculated, such as the numerator and
denominator of a percent measure. This column should also note if the indi-
cator is to be separated by sex, age, ethnicity, or some other variable.
Our example illustrates two terms that needed clarification. The definition of
“schools” clarifies that data should be collected from kindergartens through
Grade 12 (not higher-level university or professional schools). The definition
of “success” tells us the specific criteria needed for a school to be successful in
its disaster drill – otherwise, “success” could be interpreted in different ways
and leads to inconsistent and unreliable data.
3. The methods/sources column identifies sources of information and data col-
lection methods and tools, such as the use of secondary data, regular mon-
itoring or periodic evaluation, baseline or endline surveys, and interviews.
While the “Means of verification” column in a logframe may list a data source
or method, e.g. “household survey”, the M&E plan provides more detail, such
as the sampling method, survey type, etc. This column should also indicate
whether data collection tools (e.g. questionnaires, checklists) are pre-existing
or will need to be developed.
Our example has two primary methods (observation of and focus group dis-
cussions about the disaster drills), and two tools (a disaster drill checklist
39 SMART and other guidance
for indicator development is
addressed in more detail in
the IFRC Project/Programme
Planning Guidance Manual
(IFRC PPP, 2010: p. 35).

99
Annex 8 M&E plan table template and instructions
and FGD questionnaire). Both methods illustrate that the data source is often
implicit in the method description, in this case the school population.
Note: Annex 10 of the IFRC M&E Guide provides a summary of key methods/
tools with links to key resources for further guidance.
4. The frequency/schedules column states how often the data for each indica-
tor will be collected, such as weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually, etc. It also
states any key dates to schedule, such as start-up and end dates for collec-
tion or deadlines for tool development. When planning for data collection, it
is important to consider factors that can affect data collection timing, such
as seasonal variations, school schedules, holidays and religious observances
(e.g. Ramadan).
In our example, in addition to noting the frequency of data collection on the
disaster drill checklists (quarterly) and the focus group discussions (every six
months), two key dates in the schedule are noted: the start date of date col-
lection, as well as the completion date to develop the disaster drill checklist.
5. The person(s) responsible column lists the people responsible and account-
able for the data collection and analysis, e.g. community volunteers, field
staff, project/programme managers, local partner(s) and external consult-
ants. In addition to specific people’s names, use the job title to ensure clarity
in case of personnel changes. This column is also useful in assessing and
planning for capacity building for the M&E system (see Section 2.5.6).
6. The information use/audience column identifies the primary use of the
information and its intended audience. This column can also state ways in
which the findings will be formatted (e.g. tables, graphs, maps, histograms,
and narrative reports) and distributed (e.g. internet web sites, briefings, com-
munity meetings, listservs and mass media). If an assessment of M&E stake-
holders has been done (see Section 2.1.2), this would be useful to refer to
when completing this column.
Often some indicators will have the same information use/audience. Some
examples of information use for indicators include:
• Monitoring project/programme implementation for decision-making
• Evaluating impact to justify intervention
• Identifying lessons for organizational learning and knowledge-sharing
• Assessing compliance with donor or legal requirements
• Reporting to senior management, policy-makers or donors for strategic
planning
• Accountability to beneficiaries, donors and partners
• Advocacy and resource mobilization.
The same principles for completing the columns for an indicator apply when
completing them for an assumption. However, the information use/audience
for an assumption will generally be the same for all assumptions: we monitor
assumptions for the informed implementation and achievement of the project/
programme objective(s) (i.e. the assumptions need to hold true if the objective
is to be achieved).

100
Annex 9: Closed-ended questions examples
Sample question from a questionnaire (observation)
1 Is the floor of the latrine clean? 1 Yes
2 No
3 Don’t know
Sample question from a survey on HIV attitudes
1 Do you agree/disagree with the statement – the
first-aid kit been helpful to my household?
1 (Agree) a lot/very strongly
2 (Agree) a little/not very strongly
3 Neither agree nor disagree
4 (Disagree) a little/not very strongly
5 (Disagree) a lot/very strongly
6 N/A
Sample question, “What is the main source of water for drinking and cooking/washing purposes
of the household?” (check only one answer)
1 In dry season (for drinking) 1 Deep bore well
2 Hand-dug well
3 Spring
4 River/stream
5 Pond/lake
6 Dam
7 Rainwater
8 Other (specify)
2 In wet season (for drinking) 1 Deep bore well
2 Hand-dug well
3 Spring
4 River/stream
5 Pond/lake
6 Dam
7 Rainwater
8 Other (specify)
Sample question from a questionnaire
1 When do you wash your hands? 1 Before praying
2 Before eating
3 After eating
4 Before cooking
5 After cleaning baby’s faeces
6 After defecation
O Never
X Other (specify)

101
Annex 10 Key data collection methods and tools
Annex 10: Key data collection methods
and tools
Key data collection methods and tools*
The following summarizes key data collection methods and tools used in monitoring and evaluation
(M&E). This list is not complete, as tools and techniques are continually emerging and evolving in the
M&E field. Also, Annex 2 lists M&E resources that describe the process of data collection methods and
tools in more detail.
ÎÎ Case study. A detailed description of individuals, communities, organizations, events, programmes,
time periods or a story (discussed below). These studies are particularly useful in evaluating com-
plex situations and exploring qualitative impact. A case study only helps to illustrate findings and
includes comparisons (commonalities); only when combined (triangulated) with other case studies
or methods can one draw conclusions about key principles.
ÎÎ Checklist. A list of items used for validating or inspecting whether procedures/steps have been fol-
lowed, or the presence of examined behaviours. Checklists allow for systematic review that can be
useful in setting benchmark standards and establishing periodic measures of improvement.
ÎÎ Community book. A community-maintained document of a project belonging to a community. It can
include written records, pictures, drawings, songs or whatever community members feel is appro-
priate. Where communities have low literacy rates, a memory team is identified whose responsibility
it is to relate the written record to the rest of the community in keeping with their oral traditions.
ÎÎ Community interviews/meeting. A form of public meeting open to all community members.
Interaction is between the participants and the interviewer, who presides over the meeting and asks
questions following a prepared interview guide.
ÎÎ Direct observation. A record of what observers see and hear at a specified site, using a detailed ob-
servation form. Observation may be of physical surroundings, activities or processes. Observation is
a good technique for collecting data on behavioural patterns and physical conditions. An observation
guide is often used to reliably look for consistent criteria, behaviours, or patterns.
ÎÎ Document review. A review of documents (secondary data) can provide cost-effective and timely
baseline information and a historical perspective of the project/programme. It includes written
documentation (e.g. project records and reports, administrative databases, training materials, cor-
respondence, legislation and policy documents) as well as videos, electronic data or photos.
ÎÎ Focus group discussion. Focused discussion with a small group (usually eight to 12 people) of par-
ticipants to record attitudes, perceptions and beliefs relevant to the issues being examined. A mod-
erator introduces the topic and uses a prepared interview guide to lead the discussion and extract
conversation, opinions and reactions.
ÎÎ Interviews. An open-ended (semi-structured) interview is a technique for questioning that allows the in-
terviewer to probe and pursue topics of interest in depth (rather than just “yes/no” questions). A closed-
ended (structured) interview systematically follows carefully organized questions (prepared in advance
in an interviewer’s guide) that only allow a limited range of answers, such as “yes/no” or expressed by
a rating/number on a scale. Replies can easily be numerically coded for statistical analysis.
ÎÎ Key informant interview. An interview with a person having special information about a particular
topic. These interviews are generally conducted in an open-ended or semi-structured fashion.
ÎÎ Laboratory testing. Precise measurement of specific objective phenomenon, e.g. infant weight or
water quality test.
* Adapted from Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. “Monitoring and Evaluation Planning”. American Red Cross/CRS M&E Module Series. American Red Cross
and Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Washington, DC, and Baltimore, MD.

102
Key data collection methods and tools*
ÎÎ Mini-survey. Data collected from interviews with 25 to 50 individuals, usually selected using non-
probability sampling techniques. Structured questionnaires with a limited number of closed-ended
questions are used to generate quantitative data that can be collected and analysed quickly.
ÎÎ Most significant change (MSC). A participatory monitoring technique based on stories about impor-
tant or significant changes, rather than indicators. They give a rich picture of the impact of devel-
opment work and provide the basis for dialogue over key objectives and the value of development
programmes (Davies & Dart 2005).
ÎÎ Participant observation. A technique first used by anthropologists (those who study humankind);
it requires the researcher to spend considerable time (days) with the group being studied and to
interact with them as a participant in their community. This method gathers insights that might
otherwise be overlooked, but is time-consuming.
ÎÎ Participatory rapid (or rural) appraisal (PRA). This uses community engagement techniques to un-
derstand community views on a particular issue. It is usually done quickly and intensively – over a
two- to three-week period. Methods include interviews, focus groups and community mapping.
ÎÎ Questionnaire. A data collection instrument containing a set of questions organized in a systematic
way, as well as a set of instructions for the data collector/interviewer about how to ask the questions
(typically used in a survey).
ÎÎ Rapid appraisal (or assessment). A quick, cost-effective technique to gather data systematically for
decision-making, using quantitative and qualitative methods, such as site visits, observations and
sample surveys. This technique shares many of the characteristics of participatory appraisal (such
as triangulation and multidisciplinary teams) and recognizes that indigenous knowledge is a critical
consideration for decision-making.
ÎÎ Statistical data review. A review of population censuses, research studies and other sources of sta-
tistical data.
ÎÎ Story. An account or recital of an event or a series of events. A success story illustrates impact by
detailing an individual’s positive experiences in his or her own words. A learning story focuses on
the lessons learned through an individual’s positive and negative experiences (if any) with a project/
programme.
ÎÎ Survey: Systematic collection of information from a defined population, usually by means of in-
terviews or questionnaires administered to a sample of units in the population (e.g. person, benefi-
ciaries and adults). An enumerated survey is one in which the survey is administered by someone
trained (a data collector/enumerator) to record responses from respondents. A self-administered
survey is a written survey completed by the respondent, either in a group setting or in a separate
location. Respondents must be literate.
ÎÎ Visual techniques. Participants develop maps, diagrams, calendars, timelines and other visual dis-
plays to examine the study topics. Participants can be prompted to construct visual responses to
questions posed by the interviewers; e.g. by constructing a map of their local area. This technique is
especially effective where verbal methods can be problematic due to low-literate or mixed-language
target populations, or in situations where the desired information is not easily expressed in either
words or numbers.
* Adapted from Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. “Monitoring and Evaluation Planning”. American Red Cross/CRS M&E Module Series. American Red Cross
and Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Washington, DC, and Baltimore, MD.

103
Annex 11 Project/programme feedback form template
Annex 11: Project/programme feedback form
template40
Project/programme feedback form
1. DETAILS OF CLAIMANT – to be filled in by the person filing the complaint
Name:
Address:
Other relevant claimant information:
2. COMPLAINT – to be filled in by the person filing the complaint
Sensitivity of complaint: (circle or highlight one) Low Medium High
Description of complaint:
Description of expected outcome/response:
3. SIGNATURE – to be signed by person filing the complaint
By signing and submitting this complaint, I accept the procedure by which complaints will be
processed and dealt with. I have been informed of the terms for appeal.
Date:
Signature:
4. RESPONSE – to be filled in by staff
Response/remedy to the complaint:
Response/remedy was: (delete as appropriate)
Accepted/Not accepted/Not appealed/Appealed to:
Date: Staff name: Signature:
5. RECEIPT – to be filled in by staff and cut off and given to person filing the complaint
Complaint number (unique number):
Expected date of response: Place to receive response:
Staff signature: Date:
40 Note that this template is also available as part of the complete IFRC guide to stakeholder complaints and feedback, at the IFRC’s M&E web page –
www.ifrc.org/MandE.

104
Annex 12: Complaints log
Complaintslog
Project/programme:Project/programmemanager:
Project/programmelocation:Project/programmesector:
#Nameof
complainant
DateComplaint
type(fromlist
ofcategories)
DetailsofcomplaintPerson
reported
to
Sensitivity
level*
Actiontaken
(escalation,
resolutionetc)
Completion
date
1
2
3
4
5
6
* High/Medium/Low

105
Annex 13 Staff/volunteer performance management template
Annex 13: Staff/volunteer performance
management template
Staff/volunteerperformancemanagementtemplate
Name:
ObjectivesProgressupdate
(includedate)
Keyfindings/issuesNextstepsDate
due

106
Annex 14: Individual time resourcing sheet
Individualtimeresourcingsheet
Name:
Activity
Week
Totaldays
01-Sep-1008-Sep-1015-Sep-1022-Sep-1029-Sep-1006-Oct-1013-Oct-1020-Oct-1027-Oct-1003-Nov-1010-Nov-10
PlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActualPlannedActual
Data
collection
Data
analysis
Report
writing
Etc.
Totaldays

107
Annex 15 Project/programme team time resourcing sheet
Annex 15: Project/programme team time
resourcing sheet
Project/programmeteamtimeresourcingsheet
Activity
Staff/volunteername
Totaldays
JessieSmithTendikaLaneShanthaWernaEtc.
Datacollection
Etc.
Totaldays

108
Annex 16: Indicator tracking table (ITT)
examples and instructions 41
41 Note that the ITT Excel spreadsheet for this template and related instructions are also available separately at the IFRC’s M&E web page – www.ifrc.
org/MandE.
Project/programmeindicatortrackingtable(ITT)*
Project/ProgrammeName
Project/ProgrammeManagerReportingPeriod
Project/ProgrammeNo./IDProject/ProgrammeStartDate
Project/ProgrammeLocationProject/ProgrammeEndDate
Project/ProgrammeSectorExtraField
Federation-WideReportingSystem(FWRS)indicators
Peoplereached
Total
people
covered
VolunteersNationalSocietypaidstaffSecretariatPaidStaff
DirectIndirect
Grand
totalWomenMenTotalTotalWomenMenTotalWomenMenTotalWomenMenTotal
* ThisITThasexampleobjectivesandindicators,withoutafulllistofaproject/programme’sobjectivesandindicators.Also,notethattheFWRSindicatorsneedonlytoberecordedannually.

109
Annex 16 Indicator tracking table (ITT) examples and instructions
Project/programmelogframeindicators
INDICATOR
Project
baselineLoP
target
LoP
actual
%of
LoP
target
Annual
target
Year
todate
actual
%of
annual
target
Q1ReportingperiodQ2ReportingperiodQ3ReportingperiodQ4Reportingperiod
DateValueTargetActual
%of
target
TargetActual
%of
target
TargetActual
%of
target
TargetActual
%of
target
Goal
Ga.
Outcome1.Example–Improvedcommunitycapacitytoprepareforandrespondtodisasters.
1a.Example-%peopleinparticipating
communitieswhopractise5ormore
disasterpreparednessmeasures
identifiedinthecommunitydisaster
management(DM)plan.
1-Dec10%80%45%56%80%45%56%50%UK60%30%50%70%45%64%80%0%
Output1.1.Example–Improvedcommunityawarenessofmeasurestoprepareforandrespondtodiasters.
1.1a.Example-%peoplein
participatingcommunitieswhocan
identifyatleast5preparednessand5
responsemeasures.
1-Dec20%70%55%79%70%55%79%40%20%50%50%30%60%60%55%92%70%0%
Output1.2.Example–CommunityDisasterManagementPlansaredevelopedandtestedbyCommunityDisasterManagementCommittees.
1.2a.Example-numberof
participatingcommunitiesthathavea
testedDisasterManagementPlan.
1-Dec01002323%502346%10330%10550%201575%100%
Outcome2.Example–Schoolcapacitytoprepareforandrespondtodisastersisimproved.
2a.Example-%ofschoolsthat
havepassedtheannualdisaster
safetyinspectionfromtheMinistryof
DisasterManagement.
1-Dec10%50%30%60%50%30%60%20%15%75%30%25%83%40%30%75%50%0%
Output2.1.Example–SchoolDisasterManagementPlansaredevelopedandtestedatparticipatingschools.
2.1a.Example-numberof
participatingschoolsthathaveanew
DMplantested.
1-Dec01003030%453067%NANA10550%151067%201575%
Output2.2.Example–Disasterriskreductionlessonsareincludedinthecurriculum.
2.2a.Example-%ofstudentsinthe
targetedschoolswhohavereceived
disasterpreparednessanddisaster
riskeducation.
1-Dec25%75%35%47%50%35%70%25%UK30%25%83%40%35%88%50%0%

110
ITT purpose and compliance
• The ITT is an important data management tool for recording and monitoring indicator performance.
It informs project/programme implementation and management, tracking progress towards specific
targets for better transparency and accountability within and outside the IFRC.
• This ITT format is to be used by all secretariat-funded projects/programmes at the field level, and is to in-
form other indicator reporting formats within the secretariat and the larger IFRC community as appropriate.
• ITT submission should follow the agreed (required) frequency and reporting lines according to the
specific project/programme. Typically the ITT is completed on a quarterly reporting basis, as the spread-
sheet is currently formatted. However, for shorter projects/programmes, it can be reformatted to a
monthly basis.
• Typically, the ITT is completed by project/programme team members and submitted by the project/pro-
gramme manager. The ITT should be included as an annex in the project/programme management report.
Indicator performance (especially any variance greater than ten per cent) should be discussed in the report.
ITT instructions42
ITT format
• Initial set-up of the ITT for a specific project/programme will take some time, but thereafter it will be
easier to complete.
• The ITT is designed and managed in an Excel worksheet that contains all of the objectives of the
project/programme logframe, with indicators listed under their objectives. The Excel worksheet for the
IFRC’s ITT can be accessed at the IFRC’s web site for M&E: www.ifrc.org/MandE
• Excel formulas should be embedded in some cells of the ITT worksheet. These formulas make au-
tomatic calculations (e.g. percentages) and therefore reduce the amount of data that must be entered
manually. However, even with the help of formulas to automatically calculate, it is important to be care-
ful that the data has been calculated as intended. If there are problems with the formulas, you may need
to re-enter them. If necessary, seek the assistance of someone experienced with Excel.
• As the ITT mirrors the project/programme logframe, the listed objectives and indicators in the work-
sheet should remain the same throughout the life of the project/programme (unless the logframe itself
is to be changed).
• Additional guidance for the ITT and the overall M&E system can be found in the IFRC project/programme
M&E guideline (www.ifrc.org/MandE).
ITT completion – overall reminders
• Data reported in the ITT should be confirmed for the reporting period, and not made up of estimates or
guesses. If you are confused about what an indicator means or how to report on it, refer to your project/
programme M&E plan.
• Values for indicators should be numeric with descriptions reserved for the narrative report.
• Remember that “0”, “NA” and “UK” all mean different things. Entering “0” means that no progress was
made against an indicator for the given time period. If your project/programme does not measure an
indicator for a given time period (e.g. no target was set), enter “NA” (not applicable). Only enter “UK” (un-
known) for instances where an indicator target has been set, but the indicator can not be measured due
to missing or unreliable data (e.g. the M&E system may not be in place yet).
• For indicators that are measured in percentages, enter the numerator and denominator as a ratio and
then format the cell as a percentage (e.g. 50 per cent, not 0.5). This ensures that all of the relevant data
is entered into the ITT.
• A new ITT worksheet should be added for each new project/programme year as needed.
42 The IFRC’s format and instructions for the ITT were largely adopted from those developed and piloted by the American Red Cross for its Tsunami
Recovery Programme (2005-2010).

111
Annex 16 Indicator tracking table (ITT) examples and instructions
Project/Programme background information
• Project/Programme Name: Enter the project/programme name used in the proposal.
• Project/Programme No. or ID: Enter the project/programme number or ID.
• Project/Programme Manager: Enter the project/programme manager’s name.
• Project/Programme Sector: Select the appropriate project/programme sector, e.g. disaster management.
• Project/Programme Location: Enter the field location of where the project/programme is being implement-
ed (e.g. district(s) and/or province and country).
• Reporting Period: Enter the reporting period for which the ITT is being completed.
• Project/Programme Start Date: Enter the date for when the project/programme implementation will begin.
• Project/Programme End Date: Enter the expected date for when the project/programme will end.
Federation-Wide Reporting System (FWRS) indicators (for more detailed guidance on
the FWRS, Red Cross Crescent users can visit FedNet, https://fednet.ifrc.org/sw194270.asp)
• The FWRS indicators allow us (IFRC) to annually report on our global performance across project/
programme areas and locations. However, they are an important aspect of project/programme perfor-
mance and should be monitored and reported on in any case.
• The FWRS indicators only need to be reported on an annual basis, but the project/programme can
monitor them according to its own needs. It is likely that the indicator values will be determined at the
end of the calendar year, corresponding with the FWRS reporting requirements.
• The FWRS indicator guide should be carefully consulted to ensure that indicator reporting is consistent
and accurate. Measuring the FWRS indicators can be tricky, especially due to issues of double-counting
and direct/indirect recipients. Therefore, use the FWRS indicator guide, and it may be necessary to seek
the technical assistance of an IFRC FWRS resource person.
• As the FWRS indicators do not need to be reported on a quarterly basis, their measurement will likely
be determined from a review of the existing indicator performance (and with caution to avoid double-
counting according to the FWRS indicator guide).
• Targets for the FWRS indicators are recommended for people reached, and up to the project/programme’s
management for the other indicators.
Logframe objective and indicators statements
• Enter the project/programme statements for the project/programme goal, outcome(s), outputs, and indi-
cators as they appear in the logframe.
Logframe indicator reporting
• Project/programme baseline date/value – Enter the date of the project/programme baseline and value
for this indicator. If a baseline has not yet been conducted but is planned, leave this blank. If no baseline
will be conducted or no data is required for a particular indicator, write “NA” (for “not applicable”). Re-
member, not all indicators will need to be measured during the baseline. For instance, in example indi-
cator 1.2a and 2.1a, the value is zero because participating communities and schools had not developed
any disaster management plans.
• Target – Targets should be set for each quarter and are usually entered into the indicator tracking sheet
during the same time period as the planning of the annual project budget for the next year. If your project/
programme does not measure (set a target) an indicator for a respective quarter, enter “NA” not “0”. For
instance, in example indicator 2.1a, targets are “NA” because community disaster management plans had
not yet been developed to be tested.
• Actual – Enter the actual indicator value for the current reporting period. Enter only accurate data, not es-
timated data. Entering “0” means that no progress was made against an indicator for the given time period.

112
If your project/programme does not measure this indicator for a respective quarter, write “NA”. Enter “UK”
(unknown) for instances where an indicator target has been set, but the indicator cannot be measured
due to missing or unreliable data (e.g. the M&E system may not be in place yet). For instance, in example
indicator 1.a, for the first quarter, the target was set at identifying 50 people in participating communities
who practiced 5 or more disaster preparedness measures identified in the community DM plan, but it was
not possible to measure this indicator for this quarter in view of missing data.
• Percentage of target – This cell has a formula to automatically calculate the percentage of the target
that was actually achieved by the indicator during the reporting period (by dividing actual by the target).
Double check to make sure that the percentage is accurate and that the formula is working correctly. In
example indicator 2.2a for the second quarter, the number of students in the targeted schools who
received disaster preparedness and disaster risk education was larger than the original target set for Q2
for that indicator which resulted in a percentage of target of 130 per cent.
• Annual target – Annual targets are entered into this column at the start of the project/programme. All
annual targets should be included in each annual indicator tracking sheet. Annual targets for individual
indicators may be revised at the end of the year to reflect major programmatic changes/revisions. However,
revisions should not affect total life of project targets, and any revision should be authorized (e.g. approved
by the donor). See Annual targets in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a, 2a and 2.2a.
• Year to date actual – This value will change each quarter there has been indicator performance. Depend-
ing on the indicator, you may want to create a formula to tabulate this automatically. Some indicators
may need to be calculated manually (e.g. where the actual is not the sum of all quarterly actuals but the
highest number). See Year to date actuals in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a, 2a and 2.2a.
• Percentage of annual target – This cell has a formula to automatically calculate this value by dividing the
Year to date actual by the Annual target. Double-check to make sure that this is the accurate percentage
and that the formula is working correctly. See Percentage of annual target in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a, 2a
and 2.2a.
• Life of project (LoP) target – LoP targets are entered into this column at the start of the project/programme.
All LoP targets should be included in each annual indicator tracking sheet. Generally, LoP targets should
not be revised except under rare instances, and with the proper authorization (e.g. from donors). See LoP
targets in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a, 2a and 2.2a.
• Life of project actual – This value will change each quarter there has been indicator performance. Depend-
ing on the indicator, you may want to create a formula to tabulate this automatically. Some indicators may
need to be calculated manually (e.g. where the LoP actual is not the sum of all quarterly actuals but the
highest number). See LoP actuals in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a, 2a and 2.2a.
• Percentage of LoP target – This cell has a formula to automatically calculate this value by dividing the
actual to date by the life of project/programme target. Double-check to make sure that this is the accurate
percentage and the formula is working correctly. See Percentage of LoP target in indicators 1a, 1.1a, 1.2a,
2a and 2.2a.

113
Annex 17 Example risk log
Annex 17: Example risk log
Risklog
#DescriptionoftheriskImpact*Probability*Actionstoreduce
risk
Date
reported
ResponsibilityDate
closed
1ClosureofroadXpreventing
movementofdeliverablesto
villageY
HIGHHIGHAlternativeroutevia
roadZ,buttakessix
hourslonger
01/05/10JoeBloggs01/10/10
2
3
4
5
6
* High/Medium/Low

114
Annex 18: Reporting schedule
Reporting schedule
Report type/
event
Frequency
(deadlines)
Audience/
purpose
Responsibility Format/outlet
Add rows as
needed.

115
Annex 19 IFRC project/programme management report – template and instructions
Annex 19: IFRC project/programme
management report – template and
instructions 43
“Project/programme title” management report
ÎÎ The purpose of this reporting format is to highlight key information to inform project/pro-
gramme management for quality performance and accountability. This is a project/programme’s
primary reporting mechanism and it may compile information from other reports (e.g. community activity
reports), as well as provide information for other external reports for accountability and advocacy (e.g.
donor reports).
ÎÎ This report format is to be applied to all secretariat-funded project/programmes at the field
level and is to inform other reporting formats within the secretariat and the larger IFRC community as ap-
propriate.
ÎÎ Report submission should follow the agreed (required) frequency and reporting lines according
to the specific project/programme – typically reports are submitted from the project/programme man-
ager to country, regional or zone headquarters on a monthly basis for shorter projects/programmes, on a
quarterly basis for longer projects/programmes.
ÎÎ Attach the indicator tracking table (ITT) to the report annex, which should be referred to in the
analysis of implementation (see Section 3).
ÎÎ Initial set-up of this template for a specific project/programme will take some time, but thereafter it will
be easier to revise the report information for new reporting periods.
ÎÎ Instructions for completing each section in this report are included in italic. Please delete all
italicized instructions when first using the report template (this reduces length, and a copy of the
original can be separately saved for future reference).
ÎÎ Additional guidance for project/programme reporting can be found in the IFRC project/pro-
gramme M&E guideline: www.ifrc.org/MandE.
Remember – all instructions throughout the report template (written in italic) can be removed once the template is put to use.
1. Project/programme information
Project/programme reporting period: XX/month/XXXX to XX/month/XXXX
Project/programme start date: XX/month/XXXX
Project/programme end date: XX/month/XXXX
Project/programme code: e.g. G/PXXXXX
Project/programme manager:
Project/programme location: Town or city (Country)
Project/programme sector:
2. Executive summary
This section should summarize key points from the other sections of this report to provide a snapshot overview of the
project/programme’s current status and key actions planned to address any ongoing or new issues and support project/
programme implementation.
43 Note that this project/programme management report template is also available at the IFRC’s M&E web page – www.ifrc.org/MandE.

116
Overall project/programme status. Concisely summarize the overall project/programme status and whether or not
it is on track/target for the reporting period – explain why in the respective subsection below.
Federation-Wide Reporting System (FWRS) indicators. For the two FWRS indicator tables below, please refer
and adhere to the reporting requirements as detailed in the FWRS indicator guideline (https://fednet.ifrc.org/en/re-
sources-and-services/ns-development/performance-development/federation-wide-reporting-system/). Counts should be
for this reporting period. If this is not possible, please outline the reasons why.
People reached for reporting period
Total
people
covered
Direct recipients
Indirect
recipients
Total
people
reached
Male Female Total
Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual
Volunteers during reporting period
Male Female Total
Key issues. Concisely summarize any key issues (problems or challenges) that affect whether the project/programme is
being implemented according to target – identify whether the issue is pending or new.
Key accomplishments. It is not necessary to list everything accomplished, but concisely highlight any notable accom-
plishments for this reporting period.
Plans for next quarter. Drawing largely from the action points identified below in the analysis of implementation (see
Section 3), concisely summarize the overall plan of action for next quarter, highlighting any key considerations.
3. Financial status
This section should provide a concise overview of the project/programme’s financial status based on the project/pro-
gramme’s monthly finance reports for the reporting quarter. When completing this section, secretariat-funded projects/
programmes should refer to the monthly project/programme financial management report which the business objectives
system delivers to each project/programme manager’s inbox. It is important that this report is aligned with and reflects
the information in the IFRC project financial management report (which is usually completed on a monthly basis).
Please use the project quarterly finance status table below to summarize key financial data. Particular attention
should be given to spend rates and forecasts for the current reporting period.
Project/programme quarterly finance status
YTD* budget
to date
YTD expenses
to date
% of budget Annual
budget
Annual
expenses
% of budget
XX/Month/XXXX XX/Month/XXXX
* Year to date

117
Financial status explanation. Please answer the following questions in your financial analysis:
• If there have been any budget revisions greater than ten per cent from the original plan, please give reasons.
• If implementation rate looks like it will be less than 80 per cent of the budget by the end of the year, give reasons.
• If the project/programme’s budget versus actual variance is more than 20 per cent at the cost category level (supplies,
personnel, workshop, etc), please explain.
• If the project/programme is not fully funded for the year, how will this affect the project/programme’s implementation
and what is being done to address this issue?
4. Situation/context analysis (positive and negative factors)
This section should identify and discuss any factors that affect the project/programme’s operating context and implemen-
tation (e.g. change in security or a government policy, etc), as well as related actions to be taken. Some key points to guide
analysis include:
ÔÔ Use the table below to discuss any specific developments and planned response in the situation/context that
require action.
ÔÔ Remember to refer to the assumptions (risks) identified in the project/programme logframe and list any as-
sumptions (positive conditions) that are no longer valid and have become risks.
ÔÔ List any other risks that may have arisen but may not appear as an assumption in the logframe.
ÔÔ In addition to risks that have arisen, include positive factors that may affect the project/programme. (We
certainly want to discuss risks, but positive factors can be important as well, such as an improved municipal trans-
portation infrastructure that can positively affect the distribution of Red Cross Red Crescent services, or the actions
of another humanitarian organization working in the context that affects Red Cross Red Crescent service delivery.)
ÔÔ If there have been no significant issues affecting the project/programme’s situational context, state that no
major factors are currently affecting the project/programme’s operating context and implementation.
Risks and positive factors
Risk or positive factor Date Priority
High, Medium,
Low
Responsibility and
recommended action
Date
closed
1.
2.
Add rows as needed….
5. Analysis of implementation
This section should be based on the objectives as stated in the project/programme’s logframe and data recorded
in the project/programme indicator tracking table (ITT guidance and template can be accessed at www.ifrc.org/
MandE). It is a very important part of the report and should be carefully completed. Some key points to guide analysis
and reporting include:
ÔÔ Remember not just to state what happened, but to elaborate, explaining why it happened, what were the contrib-
uting factors, why were specific actions taken, who was involved and what further action is required and by whom.
ÔÔ Remember to relate quarterly performance to the project/programme’s overall targets for the year and the life
of project/programme.
ÔÔ If not activity was taken for a specific objective during the reporting period, explain why (e.g. activities under
this objective are planned for next quarter).
ÔÔ Keep it simple and short – as much as possible, only write what is necessary and sufficient to explain objective and
indicator performance. Keep it concise and relevant to the specific objective you are reporting on.

118
Analysis of project/programme implementation table
Project/programme goal: State the goal statement as it appears in the project/programme logframe
– this is only for reference, but you do not need to report on the goal performance because such overall
analysis should be covered in the executive summary above.
Outcome 1: State the outcome statement as it appears in the project/programme logframe.
Output 1.1: State output as appears in the logframe.
Output 1.2, etc: State additional outcomes as needed.
Indicator variance explanation. Variance is the difference between identified targets and
actual results. Referring to the indicator tracking table, explain any variance greater than ten per cent
(percentage of target) for outcome and output indicators reported on during this period. Explanations should
be concisely listed below by indicator number, and can be expanded on in the additional explanation section
• Indicator 1.a: Provide explanation here, e.g. “Variance was 50 per cent below target because of an early
start to the monsoon season with unexpected floods that restricted transportation to and between targeted
communities…”
• Add indicators and variance explanations as needed.
Additional explanation: Use this space for additional information not covered by the variance
explanation. This should include, but is not limited to:
• Any notable beneficiary and partner perception of work in this outcome area.
• Any unintended consequences associated with the outcome area – these can be positive or negative
consequences that were not planned for.
• An update on the outcome’s sustainability (the eventual continuation of the outcome by local stakeholders).
Outcome 1 action points
Action Person(s) responsible Timing
1. Include pending communities from prior
quarter in VCA implementation in next quarter.
David Smith, VCA field coordinator. By 30 January
2011.
Add rows for action points as needed…
Outcome 2: Complete information for Outcome 2 according to the instructions above.
Output 2.1:
Output 2.2, etc:
Indicator variance explanation. Complete information for Outcome 2 according to the instructions
above.
• Indicator 2.X:
• Add indicators and variance explanations as needed.
Additional Explanation: Complete information for Outcome 2 according to the instructions above.
Outcome 2 Action Points
Action Person(s) responsible Timing
1. Include pending communities from prior
quarter in VCA implementation in next quarter.
David Smith, VCA field coordinator. By 30 January
2011.
Add rows for action points as needed…
- - - - - Add additional outcome sections as needed - - - - -

119
6. Stakeholder participation and complaints
Stakeholder participation. Concisely describe how key stakeholders, particularly local beneficiaries, have been
involved in the project/programme (which can include project/programme design, implementation, monitoring, evaluation
and reporting). Do not include partnership issues, which are covered in the next section, partnership agreements
and accountability.
Stakeholder feedback. Using the table below, summarize any key stakeholder feedback, especially any complaints
logged through the project/programme’s stakeholder feedback mechanism. If it is a complaint, be sure to explain how it
will be handled in the recommended follow-up column. If there is no feedback, then leave blank. Be sure to update any
pending action from previous feedback.
Stakeholder feedback summary
Complaint
(Clearly indicate whether it is a
complaint or positive feedback)
Date Priority
High, Medium,
Low
Recommended follow-up
(Write “NA” is not applicable. If
applicable, explain what, who and
when follow will occur.)
Date
closed
1.
2.
7. Partnership agreements and other key actors
Only fill in this section if it is relevant to the project/programme.
Use the table below to list any project/programme partners and agreement type (e.g. project/programme agreement,
MoU). Key comments include the status of the agreement (e.g. date signed or if it remains unsigned), roles and responsi-
bilities for agencies under agreement/MoU (e.g. who is providing financial versus technical support), etc.
Project/programme partnership agreements
Partner Agreement type Status/comments
Use the table below to list any pending issues pending, resolved, or new issues, as well as actions being taken. If there
have been no significant issues, then leave blank.
Project/programme partnership issues and recommended actions
Issue Comment – update status of issue and action taken
Only complete the following table if there are any notable non-partner actors (government, civil society
organization, for-profit organization, etc.) that may affect project/programme objectives and should be
monitored.

120
Other key actors to monitor
Actor Comment
(Target and programme area, timing, any notable influence on the
project/programme and related actions)
8. Cross-cutting issues
Use this section to discuss activities undertaken or results achieved that relate to any cross-cutting issues (gender equality, en-
vironmental conservation, etc). Please discuss only new developments. Also, if already discussed elsewhere in this report, please
refer to the relevant section rather then rewriting here. It may be helpful to consider whether there have been any findings (e.g.
through monitoring and evaluations) that show how your project/programme is working to address cross-cutting issues.
9. Project/programme staffing – human resources
This section should list any new hires, recruitment or other changes in project/programme staffing, highlighting any impli-
cations for project/programme implementation. It should also include whether any management support is needed to help
resolve any issues. If there have been no significant staffing issues this quarter, state that the project/programme is fully
staffed and there are no relevant issues.
10. Exit/sustainability strategy summary
This section should be completed for all projects/programmes regardless of where they are in the implementation process.
This section does not need to repeat any outcome-specific sustainability discussion in Section 4, Analysis of Implementation.
Instead, it should summarize overall progress towards the exit strategy and eventual continuation of the project/programme
objectives after handover to local stakeholders (e.g. a local community-based organization or other partner) and any other
relevant information.
11. PMER status
This section should provide a concise update of the project/programme’s key planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting
(PMER) activities. Using the table below, summarize the key activities planned, their timing and their status (e.g. completed,
in process, planned, etc). Specific PMER activities required of all projects/programmes have been listed in the table. Other ac-
tivities will vary according to project/programme, and can be inserted appropriately. Some examples include: endline survey,
project/programme monitoring, context monitoring, beneficiary monitoring, annual reports, donor reports, M&E training, etc.
PMER activity status
M&E activities/events Timing Comments – status and relevant information
Quarterly project/programme
monitoring reports
Baseline study/survey (required of
all project/programmes)
Midterm evaluation/review
Final evaluation (endline study)
Etc.

121
12. Key lessons
Use this section to highlight key lessons and how they can be applied to this or other similar projects/programmes in
future. Note that this section should not repeat the specific action points summarized in the executive summary
(Section 1). Instead, it should highlight lessons that inform organizational learning for this and similar projects/pro-
grammes in the future.
It is recommended to concisely number each lesson for easy reference.
1.
2.
3.
13. Report annex
Attach the project/programme’s indicator tracking table.
Attach any useful supplementary information for the project/programme monitoring reporting, such as:
• ToRs (terms of reference) for any key assignments, such as technical assistance, an evaluation, a baseline survey, etc.
• Case study – if possible, a case study can be useful information for future assessment, and for distribution to appropriate
stakeholders (e.g. donors). A case study is a detailed description of individuals, communities or events illustrating how
the project/programme is having an effect locally, what that effect is and if it is in line with intended results. It can be
supplemented with photos (sent separately).
• Relevant pictures, letters, commissioned studies, reports, etc.

122
Annex 20: Example tables (logs) for action
planning and management response
Decisionlog
No.Descriptionof
decisiontaken
Factors
leadingto
decision
Consequencesof
decision
Required
actionto
implement
decision
Decision
owner
Stakeholders
involved
Review
date
Status
(Green/
Amber/Red)
Key
words
Date
posted
Associated
documents
1
2Addrows…
Actionlog
ActionNo.ActiondescriptionActionownerSupportedbyDuedateUpdate/commentStatus(Green/
Amber/Red)
Completion
date
1Deliveryof500XtovillageYJoe
Bloggs
Jim
Bloggs
15/09/102weeksdelayexpecteddue
toroadclosuretovillageY
Green01/10/10
2Addrowsasneeded…
Lessonslearnedlog
ActionNo.LessonlearneddescriptionLesson
identifiedby
Actiontobetakentoaddress/resolve
thelessonandincorporatelearning
Stakeholderwho
shouldtakelesson
forward
Review
date
Status
(Green/
Amber/Red)
KeywordsDate
posted
1
2Addrowsasneeded…

123
Annex 21 Example M&E job description
Annex 21: Example M&E job
description
Job description: Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) officer 44
Job title: Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) officer
Unit/dept/delegation: Zone X PMER unit
Reports to: XXXXXX
Responsible for: Overall development and coordination of reliable secretariat planning,
monitoring, evaluation and reporting (PMER) in zone X
Location: XXXXX zone office located in XXXXX
Travel: Approximately 30 per cent travel throughout zone region
Duration: Two-year, renewable contract beginning in June 2011
Purpose
(Example only): This position will work as part of the International Federation
of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) secretariat to support a culture
and practice of reliable planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting (PMER)
in zone X. This includes developing and coordinating monitoring and evalua-
tion (M&E) systems and events within the IFRC and among its partners, building
the capacity of secretariat and National Societies in M&E, and promoting PMER
knowledge transfer internal and external to the IFRC. The position should ensure
that PMER systems and capacity building effectively serve the secretariat and
National Societies in the zone, adhering to secretariat guidelines and policies.
Background
The IFRC is the world’s largest volunteer-based humanitarian organization,
seeking to help those in need without discrimination as to nationality, race,
religious beliefs, class or political opinions. Founded in 1919, the IFRC comprises
186 member National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, a secretariat in
Geneva and five zones worldwide, and more than 60 delegations strategically
located to support its global activities.
Describe the zone and relevant demographic, geographical, political, economic and cul-
tural factors.
Key working relationships
ÔÔ Reports to: (List job title of supervising manager)
ÔÔ Internal: PMER team members, programme officers, programme area techni-
cal leads, National Society leadership and M&E counterparts, International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and other International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement actors, etc.
ÔÔ External: Specify donor and list any appropriate local civil society and government
partners, United Nations or international agency, universities and national evalu-
ation associations/centres, M&E consultants, etc.
44 This is only an example for
illustrative purposes and
an actual job description
should be tailored to
the specific context.

124
Primary responsibilities 45
Primary responsibilities for this position include:
a. Serve as the secretariat’s focal point for M&E in XXX, coordinating M&E im-
plementation, capacity building, sharing and learning of the secretariat and
different National Societies.
b. Coordination within IFRC to ensure accurate, thorough and useful moni-
toring and reporting of project activities and impacts, both internally and
externally. This includes particularly close collaboration with the zonal
programme managers, the zone PMER department and National Societies’
PMER/operation focal points to ensure that the monitoring data is collected
and included in the reports for the operation. It may include coordination of
the work of secretariat reporting officers.
c. Spearhead the development of M&E systems with standard procedures
and process to ensure credible, reliable, timely and cost-effective monitor-
ing data to inform ongoing management decisions, strategic planning and
uphold accountability.
d. Coordination and oversight of secretariat evaluations, ensuring that they
are timely, useful and ethical, upholding the criteria and standards as de-
fined in the IFRC Framework for Evaluation. This includes ToR preparation
for, and the management of, programme surveys (e.g. baselines), real-time
evaluations (RTEs), midterm and end-of-project evaluations, special stud-
ies, and other components of the M&E system as technical assistance needs
arise; using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods and various par-
ticipatory methodologies to monitor performance.
e. Lead the adaption or development of specific planning, assessment, moni-
toring and evaluation and reporting tools for consistent and quality data
collection, coherent with and reinforcing secretariat guidelines for M&E and
reporting.
f. Provide technical guidance to programme staff in incorporating appropri-
ate M&E systems into projects/programmes based on needs, secretariat and
donor requirements, resources and capacities. This includes: 1) adequate
needs assessment to inform relevant programming, 2) the use of project and
programme logframes according to the IFRC guidelines, 3) the development
of SMART indicators that are supported by clear and concise indicator guide-
lines that define the indicators, data sources, data collection methods, fre-
quency and audience.
g. Prepare and train staff, primary stakeholders and implementing partners,
as necessary, on project/programme design, monitoring and evaluation con-
cepts, skills and tools.
h. Establish an inventory of reliable, secondary data sources of key statistics
to contribute to M&E, and to reduce the use of time and resources in primary
data collection, as well as the negative impact (assessment fatigue) among
the target populations (see also point j below).
i. Routinely perform quality control checks of M&E work, overseeing the re-
cording and reporting of progress and performance of the operation com-
pared to targets.
j. Network and coordinate with NGOs, the UN and other international
organizations to: 1) maximize the coordination and collaboration of data
collection and efficient use of time and resources, and to reduce data
collection duplication and the negative impact (assessment fatigue) among
the target populations, 2) ensure that the IFRC is kept up to date with
45 This is only an example for
illustrative purposes and
an actual job description
should be tailored to
the specific context.

125
Annex 21 Example M&E job description
contemporary issues and best practices-related relief and recovery M&E,
quality and accountability.
k. Introduce and/or maintain M&E forums among IFRC and its stakeholders,
both partners and beneficiaries, to discuss and support quality programming
and accountability standards.
l. Ensure that lessons learned from programme M&E to improve future pro-
gramme selection, design and implementation. This includes liaison with
external organizations to identify and distribute good M&E practices in M&E
and contribute to knowledge sharing.
The above list is not exhaustive and can include other responsibilities and tasks.
Duties applicable to all staff
1. Actively work towards the achievement of the secretariat’s goals.
2. Abide by and work in accordance with the Red Cross Red Crescent principles.
3. Perform any other work-related duties and responsibilities that may be as-
signed by the line manager.
Qualifications and skills
Education
• Master’s degree or higher in social sciences or related field.
Experience
• Minimum of five years’ relevant international experience both in the field
and headquarters in disaster relief, recovery or development work.
• Experience conducting M&E in humanitarian relief and development sectors,
preferably with experience in participatory processes, joint management and
gender issues.
• Experience in coaching programme staff, in facilitating training and in select-
ing and managing consultants.
• Familiarity with IFRC operating environment helpful.
Skills and knowledge
• Detailed knowledge of logframe-based project design, monitoring and evaluation.
• Conducting and/or supervising needs assessments and surveys, and quanti-
tative data analysis.
• Social research methodologies, including highly-developed analytical and
communication skills and the ability to assimilate and process information
for wide-ranging audiences.
• Ability to train project/programme staff on various M&E aspects.
• Strong commitment to the Red Cross Red Crescent Fundamental Principles
and Code of Conduct, and the ability to uphold them at all times with all
stakeholders (beneficiaries, volunteers, colleagues and partners).
• Basic understanding of legal framework of humanitarian operations, as well
as gender, protection, social or human vulnerability issues.
• Interpersonal skills and cultural sensitivity.
• Professional competency in the following computer programs: Microsoft
Windows, Outlook, Word, Excel and Access; SPSS and ideally one other major
statistical analysis software.
• Professional fluency in English and competency in XXXX.
• Valid international driving licence.
Competencies
• Self-motivated, with good judgment and initiative, and the ability to work
with and manage others.

126
• Strong interpersonal skills and ability to collaborate with and motivate col-
leagues to achieve shared goals.
• Strong capacity to handle complex tasks independently, multitask and prior-
itize, and meet multiple deadlines on time.
• Excellent verbal and written communication skills required.
• Extremely strong time management and organizational skills with very close
attention to detail.
• Able to work in a stressful environment with limited access to basic facilities.
Application procedures
Interested candidates should submit their application material by XdateX to:
(list name and address, or e-mail).
1. Curriculum vitae (CV).
2. Cover letter clearly summarizing your experience as it pertains to this job,
with three professional references who we may contact.
3. At least one writing example of a written sample most relevant to the job
description above.
Application materials are non-returnable, and we thank you in advance for un-
derstanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted for the next step
in the application process.

127
Annex 22 M&E training schedule
Annex 22: M&E training schedule
M&E training schedule
M&E training event
(with examples)
Schedule
time
Location Participants Budget
Project and
programme planning
M&E planning
Evaluation
management training
Data collector
training
Database software
training
Etc.

128
ScottChaplowe/IFRC

Humanity The International Red Cross and Red Cres-
cent Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance
without discrimination to the wounded on the bat-
tlefield, endeavours, in its international and national
capacity, to prevent and alleviate human suffering
wherever it may be found. Its purpose is to protect
life and health and to ensure respect for the human
being. It promotes mutual understanding, friendship,
cooperation and lasting peace amongst all peoples.
Impartiality It makes no discrimination as to nation-
ality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions.
It endeavours to relieve the suffering of individuals,
being guided solely by their needs, and to give priority
to the most urgent cases of distress.
Neutrality In order to enjoy the confidence of all, the
Movement may not take sides in hostilities or engage
at any time in controversies of a political, racial, reli-
gious or ideological nature.
Independence The Movement is independent. The
National Societies, while auxiliaries in the humani-
tarian services of their governments and subject to
the laws of their respective countries, must always
maintain their autonomy so that they may be able at
all times to act in accordance with the principles of
the Movement.
Voluntary service It is a voluntary relief movement
not prompted in any manner by desire for gain.
Unity There can be only one Red Cross or Red Cres-
cent Society in any one country. It must be open to all.
It must carry on its humanitarian work throughout
its territory.
Universality The International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement, in which all societies have equal
status and share equal responsibilities and duties in
helping each other, is worldwide.
The Code of Conduct for The International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster
Relief, was developed and agreed upon by eight of the
world’s largest disaster response agencies in the sum-
mer of 1994.
The Code of Conduct, like most professional codes, is
a voluntary one. It lays down ten points of principle
which all humanitarian actors should adhere to in
their disaster response work, and goes on to describe
the relationships that agencies working in disasters
should seek with donor governments, host govern-
ments and the UN system.
The code is self-policing. There is as yet no interna-
tional association for disaster-response NGOs which
possesses any authority to sanction its members. The
Code of Conduct continues to be used by the Inter-
national Federation to monitor its own standards of
relief delivery and to encourage other agencies to set
similar standards.
It is hoped that humanitarian actors around the
world will commit themselves publicly to the code by
becoming a signatory and by abiding by its principles.
Governments and donor organizations may want to
use the code as a yardstick against which to measure
the conduct of those agencies with which they work.
Disaster-affected communities have a right to ex-
pect that those who assist them measure up to these
standards.
Principles of Conduct for the International Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in
Disaster Response Programmes
1. The humanitarian imperative comes first.
2. Aid is given regardless of the race, creed or na-
tionality of the recipients and without adverse
distinction of any kind. Aid priorities are calcu-
lated on the basis of need alone.
3. Aid will not be used to further a particular politi-
cal or religious standpoint.
4. We shall endeavour not to act as instruments of
government foreign policy.
5. We shall respect culture and custom.
6. We shall attempt to build disaster response on
local capacities.
7. Ways shall be found to involve programme ben-
eficiaries in the management of relief aid.
8. Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnera-
bilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs.
9. We hold ourselves accountable to both those we
seek to assist and those from whom we accept
resources.
10. In our information, publicity and advertizing ac-
tivities, we shall recognize disaster victims as dig-
nified human beings, not hopeless objects.
The Fundamental Principles of the International
Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
The Code of Conduct for The International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief

www.ifrc.org
Saving lives, changing minds.
Project/programme monitoring
and evaluation (M&E) guide
The purpose of this guide is to promote a common understanding and reliable practice
of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for the IFRC’s project/programmes.
The intended audience of this guide is project and programme managers, as well as IFRC staff
and volunteers, donors and partners, and other stakeholders.
Key topics in this guide include:
M&E concepts and considerations
• Results-based management (RBM)
• M&E and the project/programme cycle
• What is monitoring?
• What is evaluation?
• Baseline and endline studies
• M&E standards and ethics
• Attention to gender and vulnerable groups
• Minimizing bias and error
Six key steps for project/programme M&E
• Step 1 – Identify the purpose and scope of the M&E system
• Step 2 – Plan for data collection and management
• Step 3 – Plan for data analysis
• Step 4 – Plan for information reporting and utilization
• Step 5 – Plan for M&E human resources and capacity building
• Step 6 – Prepare the M&E budget
Annexes – with additional guidance, templates, tools and resources

Edc ifrc me-guide-8-2011

More Related Content

Similar to Edc ifrc me-guide-8-2011 (20)

More from NARESH GUDURU (9)

Recently uploaded (20)

Edc ifrc me-guide-8-2011