Abstract:
Participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) is a concept meant to ensure the extensive involvement of project beneficiaries in all stages of the project or programme cycle. It is a means of empowering project beneficiaries by developing their skills and abilities to enable them to monitor and evaluate the progress, impact, relevance, efficiency, sustainability and effectiveness of the different projects that are implemented by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and negotiate and make appropriate decisions concerning their own development. Just like any development concept, participatory monitoring and evaluation is not without its challenges. The concept is undertaken by stakeholders within the stakeholder groups in participatory monitoring and evaluation and there are different dynamics that shape the nature in which participatory monitoring and evaluation is conducted and which stakeholders have more influence. Non-governmental organisations are expected to design an evaluation of the projects and programmes that include the input of all stakeholders. The challenge, however, is that different stakeholders have different perspectives, including claims and interests that are shaped by their different backgrounds and motivations.
The general aim of this study is investigate and understand the participation and negotiation process, particularly of how organisations reconcile and accommodate different stakeholder interests and positions. The precise focus of the study is to shed light on these dynamics using World Vision South Africa’s Thusalushaka area development programme in the Limpopo province as a case study. It seeks to understand how the organisation conducts its participatory monitoring and evaluation process, the power relations inherent in the process, and the extent to which project beneficiaries participate in the participatory monitoring and evaluation process. The study adopted an interpretive and social constructivist view. Qualitative research methodology was used. The sample groups were World Vision actors and key informants.
The study revealed the nature of the World Vision participatory monitoring and evaluation which echoes the criticisms of the participatory development paradigm. In as much as most of their programmes are theoretically deemed to be participatory, the practicality of the level, knowledge and engagement of project beneficiaries especially if their views/opinions have to be weighed with those of other stakeholders remains questionable. This study carries important lessons for World Vision and other organisations that practice participatory monitoring and evaluation by highlighting the fundamental areas that are key in the process and determining the level involvement of other stakeholders. It is recommended that key strategies which look at capacitating project beneficiaries and decentralising decision making are implemented in the organisations.
