Title: Monitoring & Evaluation in a dynamic health environment
Keywords: Planning and programming (incl.. budgeting and evaluation)
Health systems
Health information
Health indicators
Country: Netherlands
Institution: The Netherlands - Royal Tropical Institute (KIT), Amsterdam
Course coordinator: Dr Sandra Alba
Date start: 2018-08-13
Date end: 2018-08-24
About duration and dates: 2 weeks
Classification: advanced optional
Mode of delivery: Face to face
Course location: KIT, Amsterdam
ECTS credit points: 3 ECTS credits
SIT: Student Investment Hours: 84 hours
Contact hours: 45 hours plenary class sessions, 3 hour group presentation, 6 hours group work (case study)
Self-study hours: 30 hours
Language: English
• Compare and critically discuss the fundamental concepts that underpin effective monitoring and evaluation of health programs within health systems
• Formulate the most appropriate M&E strategy in a given situation, develop M&E plans, contrast and adapt suitable evaluation designs, tools and indicators
• Appraise and select new and innovative approaches to M&E ranging from the appropriate use of technology through to new theoretical frameworks and approaches
• Critically analyse how aid architecture and multiple stakeholders in the health system influence the design of an M&E strategy as well as participation and decision making
Assessment Procedures:
• 3 hour open book exam questions, choose 3 out of 4 questions (see below for model questions). Feedback will be given within 3 weeks and will consist of model answers.. Students who fail will be given the possibility of 1 resit (distance, via email).
• Note: the group work is not part of the assessment.
Sectoral plans at national, regional or local levels require a strategic investment in management tools that facilitate informed decision making, planning and implementation. Developing appropriate monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and management information systems is being increasingly recognised as an essential component of any health program. This context is the basis for the course content:
• Introduction to core concepts: overview of M&E, relationship between monitoring and evaluation and project cycle management
• Developments and challenges: factors that influence M&E in relation to new architectures of aid, focusing on poverty and health, the multi-stakeholder environment, partnerships, Civil Society Organisation involvement and accountability,
• Models and frameworks: advantages and limitations of commonly used approaches such as the logical framework approach, realist evaluations, theory of change, monitoring tools for human resources and economic models.
• Methodology: use of quantitative and qualitative approaches, independent reviews and participative methods, developments in information technology and quality assurance systems
• Different stakeholders: addressing and balancing perspectives of different stakeholders in decision making as well as level of participation by policy makers, donors, providers and beneficiaries
• Making M&E equity aware: for example by ensuring data is gender disaggregated; and that the perspectives of minority, disadvantaged and marginalized groups are accommodated
• Ethics: differences between evaluation and research, need for ethical approval, ethical conduct as an evaluator
Lectures, interactive discussions, group work, debates, role plays, case studies and self-study:
• 45 hours: Contact hours including lectures, exercises, group work, interactive group discussions, debates and role plays building on participant experiences
• 6 hours: Group work (case study) will consist of critically appraising the content of a tender for external M&E that was recently advertised by an international donor/organisation. Students will be asked to identify strengths and weaknesses, make recommendations for improvement, and fill in gaps (gaps and weakness may be created for learning purposes). There will be questions to guide the students. Questions will cover the content of the entire 2 weeks of the course. Students will present group work on the last day of the course.
• 3 hours: Participant groups will present the results of group work on the case study (tender) to their class colleagues who will critically appraise each other. The discussion will be moderated by the course co-ordinator who will link back main elements of the group work and discussion to the theory covered in class
• 30 hours: Self-study, where students are requested to read preparatory background documents (18 hours) and prepare for the exam (12 hours)
• Academic training or a professional qualification in a relevant area at least equivalent to BSc level
• At least 3 years professional experience in areas relevant to public health management and planning in low income countries
• Practical experience in Monitoring and Evaluation (at least 1 year)
• English level TOEFL 550 or IELTS 6.0 for applicants for whom English is not their first language
• Maximum number of students: 25
• Maximum number of topEd students: 4
Places will be allocated on a ’first come first served’ basis
Fees: 2600,- Euro
for tropEd students: 1570,-Euro
Early bird fee 2175,- Euro.
Scholarships: Possibilities through NUFFIC from 2012 (see www.nuffic.nl)Please pay attention to the NFP application period.
Major changes since initial accreditation:
• Dr Annemarie Ter Veen (Health Advisor, KIT Health) co-ordinated the course until 2014, after which she handed over to Dr Sandra Alba (Epidemiologist, KIT Health)
• The learning objectives, overall, did not change (though reworded and made more concise)
• The content is updated regularly to include recent examples and donor perspectives methods remain the same.
• The methods have been updated to include more practical exercises and sessions
• Group work and exam procedures have been revised following feedback from students who requested more hands on experience with methods used for M&E. As a result a case study was introduced, with consists for critically appraising a request for proposals for an M&E assignment recently advertised by an international donor/organisation. Students are asked to position themselves as M&E experts assigned to provide technical feedback to the funder. Students are given a list of questions to guide them in this exercise (e.g. are elements of the health system included? Can you identify gaps in the logic model? What mix of methods would you expect in the proposal to be able to answer the evaluation questions?). In order to avoid duplication between exam and group work, the exam (which used to be the preparation of the M&E component of a bid) has been replaced by short open-ended exam questions.
Student evaluation:
• Positive aspects from student evaluations include: diversity of experienced lecturers with relevant examples, covers wide range of issues, good mix of participants’ background and nationality, competency based approach
• Negative aspects: not enough practical/hands on experience, not as advanced as it is advertised, too much/too little theory.
Lessons learned:
• The main reason students apply is to acquire practical skills for M&E. Therefore 1) it is important to build in enough practical sessions in each lecture, better to cut down on lecture material time than practical exercise time; 2) the possibility of flipped classroom approach could be considered; 3) important to have a case study group work exercise for students to practice on throughout the duration of the course together with tutorial sessions to guide them.
• It is difficult to manage a course with participants who come from a mixture of backgrounds and may have different expectations about the course. People who already have extensive experience in M&E may find the course not advanced/not practical/not theoretical enough. Those who only know the basics may find the course too theoretical and covering too wide a range of topics. Thus expectations management is a very important component in this course, and needs to be built in at different stages: 1) applicants should be warned whilst reviewing their applications (i.e. before accepting them in the course) in case the person reviewing their application thinks the course may be too advanced/basic for them; 2) students should be given the opportunity to share their expectations at the start of the course; 3) the co-ordinator needs to keep track on a regular basis of progress towards expectations and intervene when possible.
tropEd accreditation:
Accredited in November 2010. Re-accredited in April 2016. This accreditation is valid until April 2021.
Remarks: online application
Email Address: P.Zwanikken@kit.nl
Date Of Record Creation: 2012-01-19 02:52:34 (W3C-DTF)
Date Of Record Release: 2017-10-09 18:25:27 (W3C-DTF)
Date Record Checked: 2017-10-09 (W3C-DTF)
Date Last Modified: 2017-10-10 16:09:27 (W3C-DTF)

Report a Problem with this Resource Record

Log In: