Qualitative methods & analysis

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Impact Evaluation and Measuring Results

- 0 comments

Author(s): Garbarino, S.; Holland, J. (for GDRSC)
Publication Date: 2009 

This GDRSC issue paper, commissioned by DFID, reviews the case for promoting and formalising qualitative and combined methods for impact evaluation and measuring results. It is part of a broader strategy amongst donors and country partners for tackling the evaluation gap.

3ie: Matching Impact Evaluation Design to the Nature of the Intervention and the Purpose of the Evaluation

- 0 comments

Author(s): Rogers, P.

Publication Date: 2009 

This is the fourth and final chapter of the fourth working paper of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie): Designing impact evaluations: different perspectives. In this chapter, Rogers argues that appropriate impact evaluation design requires situational responsiveness. The design needs to reflect the nature of the  intervention and the purposes of the impact evaluation. In particular, impact evaluation needs to address simple, complicated and complex aspects of the intervention.

3ie: Evaluating three stylized interventions

- 0 comments

Author(s): Ravallion, M.

Publication Date: 2009 

This is the third chapter of the fourth working paper of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie): Designing impact evaluations: different perspectives. In this chapter, Ravallion discusses his views on the evaluation designs for three stylized interventions: conditional cash transfers, a transport sector program and an anti-corruption commission.

3ie: Thoughts on Randomized Trials for Evaluation of Development: Presentation to the Cairo Evaluation Clinic

- 0 comments

Author(s): Karlan, D.

Publication Date: 2009

This is the second chapter of the fourth working paper of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie): Designing impact evaluations: different perspectives. In this chapter, Karlan discusses three misperceptions about randomized trials. He argues that the reliability of evaluations is improved with randomized trials, when feasible, and with attention to underlying theory and tests of why interventions work or fail.

3ie: Making the poor count: Using participatory methods for impact evaluation

- 0 comments

Author(s): Chambers, R.

Publication Date: 2009

This is the first chapter of the fourth working paper of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie): Designing impact evaluations: different perspectives. In this chapter, Chambers offers insights into how participatory approaches can open studies to the voices of those most affected by a project in a ways not possible using more conventional methods and can make the realities and experiences of poor people count more.

Designing impact evaluations: Different perspectives

- 0 comments

Author(s): Chambers, R; Karlan, D; Ravallion, M; Rogers, P

Publication Date: 2009 

In this fourth working paper of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), Robert Chambers, Dean Karlan, Martin Ravallion and Patricia Rogers present their views on the evaluation of three interventions – conditional cash transfer, infrastructure, and anti-corruption programme.

Using mixed methods in monitoring and evaluation: Experiences from international development.

- 0 comments

Authors: Bamberger, M., Rao, V., & Woolcock, M. (for The World Bank)
Publication Date: 2010 

This World Bank paper provides an overview of the various ways in which mixing qualitative and quantitative methods could add value to monitoring and evaluating development projects. It examines among others how qualitative methods could address some of the limitations of randomized trials and other quantitative impact evaluation methods.

InterAction Guidance Note 3: Introduction to mixed methods in impact evaluation

- 0 comments

Author(s): M. Bamberger (for InterAction)

Publication date: 2012 

This is the third guidance note in a four-part series of notes related to impact evaluation developed by InterAction with financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation. This note clarifies the mixed methods impact evaluation approach and provides ample information on it’s added value, applications and management implications. Case studies illustrate the potential applications and benefits.  

Community Based Poverty Monitoring in the Philippines

- 0 comments

The process of implementing policies and programs is hindered when an accurate depiction of the most pressing needs is not available. Community Based Poverty Monitoring Systems (CBMS) presents a solution to this by generating data at the local level, to better inform policy makers in their decision making. These videos illustrate the added value and process.

See video

PREVAL Training Workshop for Facilitators in M&E, Peru

- 0 comments

PREVAL is an IFAD funded programme which aims to build national and local capacity to put in place results-based, participatory M&E systems. It promotes innovative, image based PME approaches. This video reports on a PREVAL´s training workshop for facilitators in monitoring and evaluation, held in July 2008, Peru.