A review of the growth of monitoring and evaluation in South Africa: Monitoring and evaluation as a profession, an industry and a governance tool

Abstract

South Africa is one several African countries with an official ministry responsible for monitoring and evaluation (M&E). Some of the other countries include Ghana, Kenya, Benin and Uganda. The development of M&E in South Africa has been stymied in part by its interdisciplinary nature, trying to find roots within historically a very discipline-based higher education system. Over the last ten years, however, there has been a huge increase in the number, scope and quality of evaluations conducted in this country. Government agencies and Non-government organisations (NGOs) often using international donor funds for their own projects, have been engaged in outsourcing evaluation studies, and currently all government departments have established their own M&E units. There are statutory bodies such as the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the Department for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) with the responsibility to monitor and evaluate the government’s service delivery and performance. The South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association (SAMEA), established in 2005, draws together M&E practitioners, trainers in M&E, development agencies as well as government officials at its biennial conferences and sustains a vibrant community via its listserv – SAMEATalk. This article reviews the growth of monitoring and evaluation in South Africa and reflects on the current or prominent nature of M&E in this country. It deliberates about M&E developing into a profession, its growth as an industry or businessand its increasing adoption as a governance tool for development in South Africa. The paper concludes with some critical reflections on the growth of M&E in South Africa.

Designing diagnostics in complexity: Measuring technical and contextual aspects in monitoring and evaluation systems

“…We assert that assessments of M&E systems in an African bureaucratic context need to consider both technical aspects and contextual factors related to the political and organisational environments within which the system is operating. This is in keeping with the emergent 'Made in Africa' themed research from regional evaluators at the African Evaluation Association (AfrEA), the South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association (SAMEA) and other relevant platforms (Abrahams 2015). While members of the M&E community in sub-Saharan Africa are increasingly arguing that there is something unique in the context of M&E in the region, the debate is only just emerging about how this context can best be taken into account through regionally relevant methods and approaches.…”

A micro-level outcomes evaluation of a skills capacity intervention within the South African public service: Towards an impact evaluation

“…Mouton (2010) notes that, although programme evaluation was introduced into South Africa by international funding organisations, it was not until this practice was accepted and amalgamated in public service policy documents and frameworks that a culture of evaluation emerged. As such, using the NDP's concept of a developmental and capable state, the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME), as the organ of state responsible for the planning, monitoring and evaluation (Abrahams, 2015), endorses performance monitoring and evaluation as a key management intervention that should enhance public service capacity and increase the impact of service delivery interventions (DPME, 2014). A key initiative of the aforementioned department has been to introduce the outcomes approach which emphasises linking inputs and activities to outputs and outcomes (Phillips, 2012).…”

“…Despite the importance of the aforementioned, few examples of successfully implemented evaluation studies could be found (Abrahams, 2015), especially in terms of training interventions. O'Malley, Perdue and Petracca (2013) note that many training interventions do not consistently provide evidence that links specific training efforts to desired outcomes, despite a commitment to training.…”

“…Consequently, the interest in measuring the impact of skills development interventions has increased (Pillay, Juan & Twalo, 2012). Abrahams (2015) notes that within the context of the public service, monitoring was underscored until the New Public Management (NPM) approach emphasised accountability. Thereafter, a shift occurred towards including evaluation as a key performance management tool.…”

Assessing evaluation education in African tertiary education institutions: Opportunities and reflections

“…Such a scenario is mostly a result of the adoption of the New Public Management (NPM) approach to governance by many African governments which emphasizes results and the need for improving accountability and transparency. Evaluation has thus been viewed as a key performance management tool (Abrahams 2015;Mouton 2010). Further demand is now being driven by African evaluation practitioners advocating for the professionalization of evaluation.…”