BGH M&E Working Group Updates

1. BGH M&E Working GroupUpdates Siân Curtis

2. Brief History: PRH M&E WG • 2004 evaluation of OPRH M&E recommended establishing a CA M&E WG • OPRH M&E WG established in early 2005 • Vision • Community of practice of people working in M&E of OPRH projects to learn from each other, share experiences, and collectively address common problems in order to strengthen the M&E of OPRH programs. • Objectives • Raise level of understanding of and increase commitment to M&E • Improve the technical quality of M&E

3. Brief History: Expanding to BGH • 2007 USAID review of M&E in the agency included recommendation to establish a BGH M&E working group. • Suggestion to expand OPRH group to all BGH offices • Discussed with PRH M&E WG in November 2007 • Informational meetings held with HIDN and OHA in July 2008 to gauge interest in BGH M&E WG • Conclusion: Interest in establishing a BGH M&E WG but with some caveats

4. Opportunities for BGH M&E WG • Information sharing/exchange of M&E ideas between offices and between projects • Two-way communication between BGH and CAs on M&E issues • Training and skill building • Coordination between M&E initiatives in different offices and between global, USG, and CA levels • Potential forum to influence M&E thinking in BGH and more broadly

5. Challenges for BGH M&E WG • Managing the potential size and diversity of interests of the group • Maintaining clear mandate • Balance in office interests/issues • Membership – balance between inclusiveness and manageability • Logistics • Engaging field perspective and participation • Networking the networks • Funding (and time) for participation

6. Lessons Learned from PRH M&E WG • Requires active participation from across CAs and USAID • Consistency in participation important • Rotate technical leadership of meetings • Plenty of coffee breaks! • Time and funds are constraints to producing specific products • There is benefit in meeting to exchange information and experience but can be a challenge to keep momentum • High demand for skills building

7. Proposals for Structure • One full annual meeting, possibly with office or element-specific break out sessions • More frequent smaller meetings for special topics, task forces, or focus areas • Open space at full meeting to get ideas for future activities • Rotating secretariat to handle logistics and organization • Steering committee with USAID/CA balance • Flexibility for offices to determine who should participate in the WG and steering committee

8. Next Steps • Invite HIDN and OHA CAs to November PRH M&E WG • Identify Steering Committee (SC) members • Initial tasks for SC • Develop TOR for WG, including how it relates to other M&E WG • Plan first WG meeting • Develop draft scope of work for the WG and determine funding needs • Working Group meeting • Finalize and approve TOR and scope of work • Identify initial activities/meeting topics

9. MEASURE Evaluation is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) through Cooperative Agreement GPO-A-00-03-00003-00 and is implemented by the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina in partnership with Constella Futures, John Snow, Inc., Macro International, and Tulane University. • Visit us online at http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure.