euro 2007 forum v methodology

8/14/2019 EURO 2007 FORUM v Methodology

1/13

FORUM European ConferenceMay 3-4, 2007

Caspar Merkle, UN Volunteers

A Participatory Methodologyfor Assessing the Contribution

of Volunteering to Development


2/13

Background and Purpose

The promotion of volunteerism in social development asa key strategy for development has gained recognitionand support globally

There is a growing need to develop new tools for M&E to

capture the contribution of volunteerism in developmentcooperation more systematically

At the International Volunteer Sending Organisations(IVSO) Conference 2004, it was proposed that UNV in

collaboration with other Volunteer InvolvingOrganisations take the lead in the development of suchmethodology


3/13

Organisations involved(Steering committee)

Canadian Crossroads International CCI Skillshare International (UK)

Australian Volunteers International AVI

German Development Service DED Japan Overseas Co-operation Volunteers JOCV

Volunteer Service Abroad VSA (New Zealand)

United Nations Volunteers UNV


4/13

Process

Field testing in 12 countries: Bolivia, Botswana, Cambodia,Guatemala, Indonesia, Kenya, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Mongolia,Syria, Vietnam (Feb-April 2006)

Tools used: Draft guidance note & feedback sheets

Validation workshop in Bonn (June 2006) Based on experience, review of tools and further refinement

Feedback to International Volunteer Cooperation Organizations(IVCO) conference (Oct 2006)

Use of methodology in results workshop to capture UNV Tsunamiresponse (Nov 2006)


5/13

Key questions

What contribution does volunteering make todevelopment? What are the key results?

How does volunteering achieve these results? What isthe added value of volunteering? What factors help orhinder the volunteering contribution?

What lessons can be learned from volunteering and howcan they be used to enhance development planning?

Elements used: Most Significant Change (MSC),Outcome Mapping


6/13

Steps in the methodology

LEVEL 1

PLACEMENT/PROJECT WORKSHOP

Individual volunteerwith beneficiaries

Contribution ofvolunteer

Volunteer Stories

Placement Assessment

LEVEL 2

COUNTRY PROGRAMMEWORKSHOP

National level withvolunteers, beneficiariesand partners

Aggregated data fromplacement level

Exchange of keyoutcomes and keylessons

LEVEL 3

INTER-ORGANISATIONALWORKSHOP

With other VIOs andinter/national partners

Exchange of findingsbetween VIOs

Promotion of networkingand collaboration

between VIOs

Action Plan for futurecoordination

LEVEL 4

GLOBAL WORKSHOP

Aggregation of data

Global lessons learned

(Long term) Improvedplacements andprograms

GLOBAL / COUNTRYImproved placements and programs


7/13

Example of results (level 2) :GOALS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES LONGER

TERM IMPACT

Improvementsin health

The principle of GIPA (greaterinvolvement of people withAIDS) promoted in differentsectors of society

Greater involvement of PLHAsin improving their access tobasic social services

Significant reduction instigma and discrimination ofPLHAs

Greater socialacceptance ofPLHAs

Environmentalsustainability

Capacity and confidence builtamong members of selectedcommunities in naturalresource management andconservation

Awareness and involvementof communities in taking careof natural resources

Reduction inpoverty andenvironmentalprotection

Gender Equity Participation of women inproject implementation/community activitiespromoted

Capacity built among selectedwomen PLHAs

Change in perception aboutability of women to beinvolved/ participate indevelopment activities

Greater involvement ofwomen PLHAs in improvingtheir access to care, treatment

and other support services

Greaterinvolvement ofwomen indevelopmentactivities


8/13

Value added

Know more (and more systematically) about thedifference which volunteerism makes to developmentinterventions

Promotion of awareness about volunteering and its role

in development Sharing of experiences and of lessons learned between

volunteers and with a range of partners capacitybuilding

Volunteers gain wider recognition of their work & seetheir contribution in the bigger picture

Flexibility of the methodology - possibility to adaptdepending on context


9/13

Resources

~ 1 year to develop & field-test the methodology 3-6 months UNV staff time (preparation, in-house

consultations, logistics, review of material etc.)

~ 40 working days Centre for International Developmentand Training CIDT at University of Wolverhampton, UK

380 people participated in the pilots (includingbeneficiaries, volunteers, partners)

Financial cost: ~ 77.000 USD (including consultants,travel, workshops)


10/13

ChallengesDuring the workshops

Different concepts related to volunteering in differentcountry contexts

Specification of soft aspects of volunteering such asmotivation, adaptability, knowledge of local context

Definitions between outputs, outcomes, impact

In some cases claiming credit beyond actual contribution

Full involvement of beneficiaries, partners, other

stakeholders

Aggregation

Data is (country-) context-specific

Differences in quality and language of workshop reports


11/13

Lessons learned

Plan workshops well in advance and improve partnerbuy-in

Training of facilitators in advance

Long enough workshops to produce in-depth analysis

(minimum 2 days) Translation of tools into local language, including

facilitation notes

Avoid too much technical terminology

Adaptation/simplification of elements of themethodology, e.g. steps in the process

Methodology works better if volunteers have been in

their assignments for at least 2 years


12/13

Future use

Project evaluation exercises, i.e. as preparation beforethe arrival of the evaluation team

UNV results workshops, to capture aggregatecontributions of volunteers to development outcomes

As part of the end-of assignment reporting at theindividual volunteer level

As part of UNV inputs to e.g. UNDP country reviews

Sharing of experience with its use with other VIOs &further enhancement


13/13

Thank you!

euro 2007 forum v methodology

Documents