Fit-for-purpose M&E in the South African context

Measurement of performance and impact is essential for all development stakeholders looking to bring about meaningful social change. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) or impact management and measurement (IMM)1 provides us with a structured way of understanding what a social investment is achieving. However, our efforts to measure success are meaningful only if they are appropriate for the real-world context in which they are being applied. As part of exploring this, Tshikululu hosted a webinar on fit-for-purpose M&E in the South African context on 11 July 2024.

The misalignment between funder M&E requirements and the capacity and capabilities of non-profit organisations (NPOs) to meet those requirements is a prevalent challenge within the South African context. While this may be less true for well-established organisations with diverse funder bases, it remains the case for many community-based organisations (CBOs), which are typically operating at a grassroots level with extremely limited resources. At the same time, top-town approaches to M&E can be extractive in nature, with the effort put into M&E having clear benefits for the funder without obvious benefit for the NPO. This forms the basis of a relationship that prioritises upwards accountability to the funder over downwards accountability to the grant recipient or end beneficiaries.

In this situation, NPOs (especially poorly resourced CBOs) often struggle to meet the requirements of social investors, while social investors face the difficulty of not being able to measure and report on the impact of their investments in accordance with their expectations. It is easy for this to lead to impact washing (making false or under-supported claims of achieving impact) without fostering meaningful reflection and improvement.

Despite the challenges associated with it in practice, however, M&E has intrinsic benefits: it helps to formalise reflection and learning, promote continual improvement, and enhance accountability. Where challenges arise is in a model of engagement that prioritises the funder’s needs over those of the recipients.

The webinar provided an opportunity for M&E and social investment sector representatives to explore this complexity. South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association (SAMEA) board member Mishkah Teladia shared four key considerations that make M&E fit-for-purpose:

1. Complexity-aware M&E and incorporating a systems lens, which entails embracing complexity in M&E practices to better understand dynamic environments
2. Decolonial approaches to M&E, which recognise diverse ways of knowing and are conscious of power imbalances in the funding relationship
3. Adaptive management in M&E, which uses adaptive management techniques to improve continuous learning, adaptation and project effectiveness
4. Localisation and participatory M&E, which aims to ensure that ownership of M&E is held by local stakeholders to make the process more meaningful to those most affected.

Panellists Lebohang Letsela (Senior M&E Specialist at Tshikululu) and representatives of our clients, Abel Madonsela (Group Head: Stakeholder Relations & Transformation at Bushveld Minerals) and Sarah Rennie (Board Trustee at Epoch & Optima Trusts), built on this to explore how we as a sector can work to make M&E for fit for purpose in South Africa. The discussion highlighted that, fundamentally, M&E needs to provide timely information for decision-making, which has implications for how we define the minimum viable elements of M&E in a resource-constrained setting. A fit-forpurpose approach must take into consideration who the decision-makers are and what information they need, to ensure that M&E answers the right questions.

Our experience as Tshikululu has borne this out: we have found that, to be considered fit for purpose, M&E must be based in a thorough understanding of the context and be implemented through mutually beneficial partnerships. In practice, for social investors this means:

• Taking the context and all relevant stakeholders into consideration from inception;
• Resourcing effectively to promote success, including investing in research to understand the context, establish baselines and evaluate impact;
• Taking a participatory approach to M&E that encourages co-creation and shared ownership;
• Being open to flexibility and adaptation to meet the needs of all stakeholders;
• Putting learning and reflection at the centre of M&E; and
• Committing to upwards and downwards accountability.

Accountability and transparency are fundamental to building trust in the sector and in our often contentious social and political climate. There is a need for a balanced approach, such that organisations doing social impact work on the ground are not burdened by unnecessarily onerous M&E requirements, complicated tools and the expectation of readily available, unplanned capacity. Amidst these tensions, there is a clear role for specialists that understand funder contexts as well as communities and can mediate between them. The more we can create shared understanding for mutual benefit, the closer we are able to come to an approach to M&E that is truly fit for purpose.

1 IMM and M&E are different terms referring to measuring the impact of social investments. IMM is used more often in the impact investing world, while the philanthropy/ development world has typically used M&E. In this document we will use “M&E” as a cover term for the sake of simplicity. Tshikululu is South Africa’s leading social investment fund manager and advisor, working alongside investors and other development partners to achieve sustainable social impact. More information about our services can be found on our website, or you can contact us at info@tshikululu.org.za.