IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v77y2019ics0149718918303902.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the monitoring and evaluation system of a population-based program: Theory-driven evaluation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Huey T.
  • Morosanu, Liliana
  • Powell-Threets, Kia
  • Lian, Brad
  • Turner, Nannette

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of a monitoring and evaluation system (M&E) for a population-based program and to identify factors influencing its performance. The state health department provided a grant, guide, and training for health districts to implement the program and report quarterly and annually to the M&E. Some health districts did not meet this requirement. We also found that the M&E did not adequately capture the actual work of the districts in communities as related to the work plan. We identified several factors that negatively affected the performances of the M&E. For example, the state and health districts did not have a shared vision on how to develop and implement the program, and what to report to the M&E. We proposed strategies that could improve the timeliness and content of reports to the M&E, as well as its utilization in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Huey T. & Morosanu, Liliana & Powell-Threets, Kia & Lian, Brad & Turner, Nannette, 2019. "Assessment of the monitoring and evaluation system of a population-based program: Theory-driven evaluation approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:77:y:2019:i:c:s0149718918303902
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718918303902
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101719?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keith Mackay, 2007. "How to Build M&E Systems to Support Better Government," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6851.
    2. Ronette Engela & Tania Ajam, 2010. "Implementing a Government-wide Monitoring and Evaluation System in South Africa," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 27574.
    3. Peter Dahler-Larsen, 2014. "Constitutive Effects of Performance Indicators: Getting beyond unintended consequences," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 969-986, October.
    4. Marra, Mita, 2018. "The ambiguities of performance-based governance reforms in Italy: Reviving the fortunes of evaluation and performance measurement," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 173-182.
    5. Midgley, G., 2006. "Systemic intervention for public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 466-472.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Geoffrey Shepherd, 2011. "Conducting Diagnoses of M&E Systems and Capacities," World Bank Publications - Reports 11054, The World Bank Group.
    2. K K Govender & N.Z Hlatshwayo, 2015. "Monitoring and Evaluation in the Public Sector: A Case Study of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform in South Africa," Asian Journal of Economics and Empirical Research, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 2(2), pages 91-99.
    3. Melinda Craike & Bojana Klepac & Amy Mowle & Therese Riley, 2023. "Theory of systems change: An initial, middle-range theory of public health research impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 603-621.
    4. Holvoet, Nathalie & Inberg, Liesbeth & Sekirime, Susan, 2013. "Institutional analysis of monitoring and evaluation systems: comparing M&E systems in Ugandas health and education sector," IOB Working Papers 2013.03, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    5. Chiara Oppi & Cristina Campanale & Lino Cinquini, 2021. "Il problema dell?ambiguit? nei sistemi di misurazione della performance nel settore pubblico: un?analisi della letteratura internazionale," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(2), pages 11-38.
    6. Sergii Slukhai, 2011. "M&E and Budget Program Performance Measurement in Ukraine: Current State and Needs for Improvement," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2011(2), pages 28-47.
    7. Marco Kools & Virginia E. Vitiello, 2010. "Good Governance of Early Childhood Development Programmes in Developing Countries: The need for a comprehensive monitoring system," Papers indipa597, Innocenti Discussion Papers.
    8. Aiwanehi Barbara Ofuani & Abdul-Hameed Adeola Sulaimon & Sunday Abayomi Adebisi, 2018. "Corporate Governance Practices: A Comparative Study of Selected Public Corporations in Nigeria," Academic Journal of Economic Studies, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 4(1), pages 192-202, March.
    9. Gaarder, Marie & Briceno, Bertha, 2011. "Institutionalisation of government evaluation: Balancing trade offs," 3ie Publications 2010-8, International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie).
    10. Giliberto Capano & Benedetto Lepori, 2024. "Designing policies that could work: understanding the interaction between policy design spaces and organizational responses in public sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 53-82, March.
    11. Fontdevila, Clara, 2023. "The politics of good enough data. Developments, dilemmas and deadlocks in the production of global learning metrics," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Elsie Mbua Eposi, 2024. "Enhancing the Quality-Of-Service Management for Managers and Frontline Employees: The Case of Post Office Services, South Africa," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 46-60, July.
    13. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.
    14. Jeongeun Kim, 2018. "The Functions and Dysfunctions of College Rankings: An Analysis of Institutional Expenditure," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 59(1), pages 54-87, February.
    15. Julia Heuritsch, 2023. "The Evaluation Gap in Astronomy—Explained through a Rational Choice Framework," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-26, June.
    16. Daniel Culotta & Arnim Wiek & Nigel Forrest, 2016. "Selecting and coordinating local and regional climate change interventions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1241-1266, November.
    17. Elizabeth Troncoso & Francisco Ganga-Contreras & Margarita Briceño, 2022. "Incentive Policies for Scientific Publications in the State Universities of Chile," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Therese Riley & Liza Hopkins & Maria Gomez & Seanna Davidson & Daniel Chamberlain & Jessica Jacob & Sonia Wutzke, 2021. "A Systems Thinking Methodology for Studying Prevention Efforts in Communities," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 555-573, October.
    19. Nicolò, Giuseppe & Raimo, Nicola & Polcini, Paolo Tartaglia & Vitolla, Filippo, 2021. "Unveiling the link between performance and Intellectual Capital disclosure in the context of Italian Public universities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    20. Daniel Nigohosyan & Albena Vutsova, 2018. "The 2014–2020 European Regional Development Fund Indicators: The Incomplete Evolution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 559-577, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:77:y:2019:i:c:s0149718918303902. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.