Practical considerations
In carrying out intelligent monitoring, there
is a series of practical considerations. These are set out here
as:
These are discussed in turn below.
Rules of thumb
There are three rules of thumb to be applied
to monitoring practice [1].
First, start early: begin the
discussion about monitoring early.
The Decision Support Tool has the
establishment of monitoring and evaluation as a ‘tactical decision’
during the design of the funding model, that is,
before implementation [2].
You may need to consult potential providers at this stage. Be
clear about your monitoring requirements when you invite
applications or tenders and be prepared to discuss them at that
stage. Too often, the discussion about monitoring starts
during the tender or application process, or even after the
award. This does not allow time for proper planning. It
makes it hard for the provider to cost the monitoring requirement
and build that cost into its proposal for funding. All this
tends to lead to disproportionate and badly-managed monitoring.
Second, justify your need for
information.
It is not sufficient to impose a
requirement. Funder and provider should agree the
requirement. Funders should expect providers to ask them to
justify requests for information. This contributes to good
decision-making by funders.
Third, give feedback: tell
the provider what you will do with the information you ask for.
Providers are more likely to engage with
monitoring requirements if they can see how they contribute to
higher goals. Sending information into a ‘black hole’ is
demotivating. If a provider knows what information is needed
for, it may be able to suggest a better piece of information or a
better source.
All three rules of thumb depend on good
dialogue between funder and provider, identify and overcome risk
and help improve how public services are delivered. This positive
working relationship between funder and provider can be achieved by
recognising and implementing compact commitments [3] which this guidance is consistent
with.
Validating questions
You can use eight questions
to test and validate your approach to monitoring. These are
set out in the table below. For each question, an explanation
and an example are given. These questions should be asked at
regular intervals throughout the funding agreement or programme to
ensure that reporting remains proportionate.
Eight questions
- Can the information be provided less
frequently?
- Can the information be provided in time with the
provider’s own reporting
systems?
- Can the information be reported only by
exception?
- Is there an alternative item of information,
perhaps more cost-effective, that could be used instead?
- Can information that the provider already collects for
another funder be used instead?
- Can this information be collected on a sample
basis?
- Can this information be collected other than from the
provider – such as a survey?
- How can you assure the reliability of this
information?
Each question is explained in Annex B.
Finally, a fictional
example of monitoring a programme is shown.
Notes
-
Drawn from Office of the Third Sector,
Principles of Proportionate Monitoring and Reporting,
Cabinet Office, 2009
-
-