1. F2F M&E System Opportunities for Improvement
F2F Implementers Meeting 12/7/2017
Sadie
Upward focused – not focused on learning and adapting

2. M&E System Challenges Complexity and Time Trade-Off
Barrier to Entry for new Organizations
Barrier to Learning, Collaboration, Innovation and Adaptation
Is it serving our purposes?
M&E System Challenges
Sadie
Developed iteratively in an ad hoc way. Might be fruitful to take a step back and look at the system as a whole

3. Complexity
Many pieces: Tables, Indicator Definitions, M&E Do’s and Don’ts, 7 Session Online Training, Extensive ongoing discussion and training
Requires high level of fluency in English and MS Excel
Takes a long time to learn
Difficult to be consistent among Implementers
Time Trade-Off – M&E and Implementing and Innovating
Sadie
We’ve talked a lot about individual indicators- let’s talk about the tables.

4. Barrier to Entry
The M&E system is the highest barrier to entry to the F2F Program.
It’s not in the implementing partners’ interests to lower barriers to entry to F2F, but it is in USAID’s interests.
The system is simple enough that it is an investment that only pays off in the context of F2F but complicated enough that it takes a long time to train on.
But, the causal model is simple.
Eric
If it’s one thing I learned working on the small grants program at VEGA, it’s that most new entrants can handle deploying volunteers safely and productively. It’s the reporting requirements that they, to a grantee, struggled with.

5. Barrier to Innovation and Adaptation
Are we structuring our country projects around the M&E system? We’re free to choose custom indicators, but the cost of custom indicators is high given the already high costs of the standard indicators.
Peter
Trade off of high focus on number of volunteer assignments and actual impact.
We have had a lot of innovative ideas about how to increase impact and have an even more cost-effective model, but our indicators don’t measure these things. (example of remote assignment component in addition to the in-country assignment model. The only way this can be captured is through leverage, though.

6. Barrier to Collaborating, Learning and Adapting
The F2F M&E system creates a data set that isn’t comparable with any other indicator data. Our unique system creates unique data.
Could align better with FTF or GFSS indicators
Sometimes false sense of comparability between programs, but each region has its own unique context and they are hard to compare
Peter
An X length of assignment in one region for a particular program can mean something different.
Even number of volunteer assignments can be an unfair comparison between regions because of the difference in cost to fly to a particular country or how much it costs to operate in a given country.

7. Ideas for Changes Revise Certain indicators
Changes to the table format
Drop some indicators
Make more room for custom indicators
The ask: A meeting dedicated to going over these revisions after awards are decided
Peter
Can we create a system that better fits or needs?
Our intention here is to start a discussion to continue at the kickoff meeting for the new program. The revised tables are food for thought and to get people into the habit of thinking that we’re capable of making changes to our own system.

8. Suggested Deletions For Table 1
differentiation between SOWs and assignments - one SOW= one assignment
Type of Volunteer or Commodity Chain. What is the utility of this as it is somewhat arbitrary?
differentiation between persons assisted and persons trained.
Categorizing volunteer recommendations made.
Number of volunteer recommendations made.
Sadie
Switch to Excel to show revised tables
Eric – I disagree on counting volunteer recommendations, but if you want to make a case for that you can,.

9. Suggested Changes to Tables 2-3
Consolidated into one table with baseline, midline and endline in one place.
No more categorizing beneficiaries.
No more gross sales vs net income. Use Feed the Future indicator
No more area of potential production influence.
No more environmental indicator.
Eric
Removes a lot of trouble reconciling tables 2 and 3.
FTF indicators Eric is proposing – Can we put them on the slide?

10. Suggested Changes to Table 4
No more categorizing outreach events.
Eric
Removes a lot of trouble reconciling tables 2 and 3.

11. Let’s Discuss!
Sadie

12. Thank you!