Comparison of the Monitoring and Evaluation Systems of the World Bank and the Global Fund
The purpose of this study is to document the approaches of the World Bank and the Global Fund to monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and to systematically and objectively compare the principles and objectives of the M&E systems and how these s...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2017
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/876011468171577984/Comparison-of-the-monitoring-and-evaluation-systems-of-the-World-Bank-and-the-Global-Fund http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26678 |
Summary: | The purpose of this study is to document
the approaches of the World Bank and the Global Fund to
monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and to systematically
and objectively compare the principles and objectives of the
M&E systems and how these systems are implemented and
used in practice at the country level. The report also
discusses the relationship of the M&E systems to the two
different business models of the World Bank and the Global
Fund. The first goal is to identify whether and how the
conclusions that emerge from their M&E systems on the
effectiveness of their respective global health activities
can be compared. The second goal is to contribute to the
ongoing process of identifying good practices for developing
M&E policies for global health programs, setting up
M&E frameworks, planning and programming evaluations,
and using M&E results more effectively to manage
programs and strengthen the health policy process in partner
countries. The report is organized as follows. Section two
summarizes the World Bank's stated policies and
approach to monitoring and evaluation. Each element of
standard M&E systems framework; system of indicators and
performance measurement; data collection and analysis;
feedback and use of monitoring findings; and evaluation is
described for the World Bank's approach in this
section. Section three summarizes the Global Fund's
stated M&E approach and policies according to the same
structure. Section four compares the application of the
approach to M&E of the two agencies in Burkina Faso,
Lesotho and Russia. Section five provides a summary of the
comparison between the two approaches to M&E. Section
six identifies conclusions and lessons learned. |
---|