MARATTO

article · African Evaluation Journal

A results-based monitoring and evaluation system for the Namibian Child Support Grant programme

20243 citationsOpen accessStellenbosch University

Abstract

Background: Robust results-based monitoring and evaluation (ME) systems allow government to track the progress and impact of development programmes. This article focused on the current ME system as adopted for the Child Support Grant (CSG) programme of the Ministry of Gender Equality, Poverty Eradication and Social Welfare (MGEPESW) in Namibia.Objectives: The article examined whether the adopted ME processes and arrangements for the MGEPESW sufficiently track the outcomes for beneficiaries of the CSG programme to enable strategic decisions by the MGEPESW.Method: A desktop review of available literature on ME systems was complemented by a review of strategic reports and programme documentation of the MGEPESW that sets out the current ME arrangements. Further interviews with senior, middle and programme managers responsible for the implementation of the CSG programme assessed the suitability and gaps of these arrangements as well as the proposed recommendations to strengthen the existing ME arrangements.Results: The research found several gaps in current practice that hinders the MGEPESW and decision-makers in assessing the outcomes for child beneficiaries.Conclusion: Recommendations were offered to improve the current ME system to better track the outcomes of the CSG programme. This included a refined theory of change, revised indicators and strengthened institutional arrangements.Contribution: The improved results-based ME system for the MGEPESW offers a comparative base for the implementation of results-based ME systems for child-focused cash transfer programmes in similar contexts.

Research topics

  • Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare
  • Child and Adolescent Health
  • Early Childhood Education and Development

Sustainable Development Goals

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.4102/aej.v12i1.716

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.