Training course on Participatory Monitoring and
Conducted from 21 - 25 August, 2006
At ELD, Jawalakhel, Lalitpur
The Empowerment and Learning Development Centre (ELD)
This report highlights the key achievements and documents the process of a training course on
Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (PM&E). The Empowerment and Learning Development
Centre (ELD) organised the five-day training from August 21 - 25, 2006 at the ELD training centre,
The objectives of the training were to:
• Develop clarity on various concepts related to PM&E
• Equip participants with a range of hands-on tools for facilitating PM&E
• Enable participants to facilitate PM&E in their own
respective working areas
Uttam Uprety led the course as main facilitator with two
sessions being led by an external expert. Altogether there
were seven participants representing:
• International Nepal Fellowship
• SAP Nepal
• Search for Common Ground
• The Mountain Institute
While preparing this report, the facilitator has included the responses of participants from daily
feedback and final training evaluation results, as well as personal observation.
This report is organised as follows:
• Training Evaluation
• Daily Narrative
o Workshop Schedule
o Workshop Products
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -2-
The training was successful for several reasons. Firstly the participants, by the end of the course,
had acquired conceptual clarity of various aspects of Monitoring and Evaluation including
terminologies as used by various development organisations. Furthermore, they got basic
knowledge of Social Auditing - a recent concept in development management. They learned
various hands-on tools to facilitate Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, ranging from PRA, AIA
and TOP (Technology of Participation) to ZOPP. Finally, sufficient opportunities for practicing the
tools enabled them to reflect on their working context and plan how to use such tools in their
The training was responsive and up-to-date with new concepts and tools. The facilitator also
customised the course and included the contents to address participants’ individual expectations.
The course was adapted in places to meet the multi-cultural environment.
Participatory discussion during the workshop widened the participants' horizons. They agreed to
use these tools as their situation demands in planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. From the first
day, participants were actively participating in group interaction. They raised practical concerns and
brought their field experiences into the discussions. The facilitator observed that participants
wanted to reframe every session from the course in their own context.
The training maintained a balance between theory and practical sessions. However, except for
some tools (as participants wanted to know about more tools during the course), the emphasis was
on practical applications rather than theory. Participants enjoyed the sessions very much, leading
to increased confidence in applying such tools. The final day’s evaluation indicated that they had
identified areas to apply such tools not only in PM&E, but also in planning, review, and other
Participants praised the training team for managing the workshop effectively. They appreciated the
facilitators’ knowledge and skills on the subject matter as well as the training management. Enough
reference materials were provided to the participants for each session. Facilitators provided digital
copies of slides developed during the training together with other reference materials on CD.
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -3-
The training was evaluated using a Rapid Rural Evaluation scattergram. From the results we can
see that, overall, participants were extremely happy with all aspects of the course.
-20 -10 0 +10 +20
Objectives met? ☺☺☺ ☺☺☺☺
Presenter’s skills? ☺☺ ☺☺☺☺
Her/his knowledge of ☺ ☺☺☺☺
Logistics ☺ ☺☺☺☺
Your Skills ☺☺☺ ☺☺☺☺
Confidence gained? ☺☺☺☺ ☺☺
Worth coming? ☺☺☺ ☺☺☺☺
Individual comments collected included:
• Overall, I enjoyed the course very much and also appreciated the facilitator’s skills and
competence. It would be even better if the application (practical) of the tool was given after a
very brief description of the tool followed by the presentation on its theory.
• It was an excellent training for me, especially as I was never exposed to these tools and have
the responsibility to develop a monitoring system for my organisation.
• Use of LCD, marker and cards, white boards simultaneously helped to fresh participants mood
• I will try to participate more in such kinds of training
Possibilities for Improvement
• It would have been more useful beneficial for me if the course was delivered in only Nepali
• More exercise on indicators developments needed
• Such kind of training should be residential
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -4-
Day One was useful for the participants in Your Expectations…
helping them understand:
Competency in using PM&E tools
• Various terminologies related to project Develop a PM&E system for radio program and
community peace building activities
Monitoring and Evaluation Proficiency in M&E methodologies
• How participatory M&E differs with
conventional M&E in various aspects.
Principles, norms of PM&E
The training began half an hour later than the To get the clear vision of PM&E system to run the
scheduled time as three participants were late.
As a result, we had to drop some of the slides
from the presentation. Regarding Monitoring and
Evaluation, the session duration was bit short ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 1
considering the number of slides to cover.
Sharing expectations of both the participants and
their line managers made them reflect on how Line Manager’s Expectations..
their line managers perceived the importance of
Knowledge on overall M&E system to bring greater impact on
the training. project’
project’s in coming days
Skills to develop the M&E tools and apply in the projects
While discussing the ‘what and why’ of in
Skill to facilitate and use effective participatory approaches in the
participation, Uttam shared on the group Learn about the theory and practice of PM&E
dynamics of decision making. Key points from Learn best practices
the discussion were: Learn effective ways of implementing a monitoring system
Train staff and community focal points
Learn about project M&E process
• Generally when a group starts a discussion, retreat
Facilitate group meetings for Mountain Forum Staff and staff retreat
we expect participants to share their
ideas/opinions in a way without confrontation ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 6
and reach a conclusion – however, this
• When opinion is so diverse as to make it difficult to come to closure or premature decisions are
• Participation is ensured only if the facilitator is skilled and knows the group dynamics well.
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -5-
Group Dynamics in Decision Making
Shared Frame Decision
ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 13
Discussing on Monitoring and Evaluation, the facilitator led a discussion and later summarised the
discussion to agree a definition. The group identified some of the criteria to distinguish Monitoring
and Evaluation as:
• Time/ frequency
• Involvement of project/program staff and community
Happy about … Concerned about …
• Good content of the program • Program started late
• Good team • Did we go off track as we wanted to be
• Everything nice more participatory?
• Interesting material • Poor time management-should stick to
• Format of course planned schedule
• Group dynamics in decision making • Appreciative Inquiry approach
• Key aspects of M&E • More talking on English
• Introduction to M&E still to be covered more
• Philosophy of participation
• Introduction of M&E
• Lunch and refreshments
• Time and topics covered
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -6-
Following a review of the first day, the facilitator gave a brief overview of various participatory tools
to facilitate PM&E. He highlighted the uniqueness and use of tools from PRA, Appreciative Inquiry
Approach (AIA), LFA, and other approaches that can be used in facilitating various stages of
The overview of various participatory tools made participants aware of the varieties of tools
available. The tools listed are not even comprehensive, as different organisations are using
different sets of tools in PM&E.
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -7-
The group then discussed and shared their experiences with Social/Resource Mapping and key
issues discussed were:
• Handing over the stick is key for empowerment
• Questioning skill is best tool for the facilitator
• Identifying key informants is very important aspect in any facilitation
• What is the difference between making a map on the spot and bringing key informants
• Date, key informants and facilitators are to be included in any map
• Local symbols are very important
• Social/Resource maps can be used for PM&E to make the changes visual.
• The tool by itself doesn't bring lot of information; it should be used as a springboard for
The next tools discussed were the Venn diagram and Communication Linkage Matrix. The
facilitator introduced the Venn diagram as a PM&E tool. Participants discussed a lot on the size of
the circles and relative distances. Unlike their previous concept of using this tool in organisational
assessment, they realized that it could also be used in assessing satisfaction with program / project
The tool was followed by the Communication Linkage Matrix. The facilitator explained how this tool
can be used in various situations. Participants appreciated how the Communication Linkage Matrix
could be used in triangulating the Venn diagram tool in a participatory way.
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -8-
In response to the issues raised by participants such as ‘How to develop criteria for matrix?’ and
‘Are there any universal criteria?’, the facilitator clarified that people’s responses during Venn
diagramming regarding the size and distance of the circles should be taken as criteria for
communication linkage matrix. Further, he emphasised the need of setting criteria common for all
components under evaluation.
The session on Discussion method was also highly interactive. We discussed on and concluded
that common problems include:
• Not going to the deep level interaction:
only superficial level
• Going off-track
• Drop out
• Know-it-all types people
• Discussion for the sake of discussion
• Not coming to the closure zone
• No fresh ideas
• Time management
The group further agreed that:
• The facilitator has to make sure that these qualities are maintained in any discussion
• S/he needs to use facilitative listening skills to make sure that everybody gets the point in
the way the presenter intended it
• There needs to be a structured method of discussion.
Happy about … Concerned about …
• Good tools shared • How am I going to use them in my project?
• Good knowledge gained • Not confident at skills level
• All good today only some more translation • Not very clear about social/resource
needed mapping and its use in M&E of project
• ORID methods • How to retain all the information provided
• Organisation of the presentation (lot of concepts)
• Venn diagram
• All topics covered and social map
• Communication linkage matrix
• Time management
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 -9-
Participants were happy with the review session, Environmental Scanning
even though it was very extensive and took more Method
time than scheduled. After the review, the facilitator Influence Time 1995 2000 2005
highlighted the art of designing questions for the 4- acity
level discussion method known as ORID. Participants National
had the opportunity to identify the questions for the What do we see
How can we name
four levels from scramble cards that gave them
Regional this period?
in this period?
confidence in setting questions. District
The next activity was discussion design. Participants
were grouped and given an assignment to design ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 68
questions to facilitate the discussion. One
representative from each group facilitated the Workshop Method: Overview
discussion. Participants and the facilitator gave Focus Question of the Workshop ?
feedback on both the questions themselves as well
as individuals’ facilitation styles.
Due to time constraints, only the theoretical aspects
of Environmental Scanning were covered on Day
Two, with the practical part rescheduled for the final A B C
The practical session on Workshop Method met with ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
good response from participants. The workshop
product is annexed.
Happy about … Concerned about …
• Workshop practice • Some participants arriving late and leaving
• Discussion practice early
• ORID discussion method and practical
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 - 10 -
The first session explored the tool the Empowerment Circle, which was new for participants.
Discussion on this tool was useful, and participants shared a lot of their experiences.
While discussing the Empowerment Circle, the
facilitator highlighted its uses as: Hierarchy of Types of Indicators Indicators
• Identifying local criteria for any changes - not Goal Impact
• Assessing changes from both a personal and
group perspective Objectives Effect
• Triangulating the evaluation results from other Usages
• Making the evaluation aspects visual and Results Availability
simplifying terms like empowerment into various Coverage
ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 164
The next session looked at the Ranking Method. Two
types of ranking - matrix and pair-wise – were
discussed. Result Chain: Exercise
The post-lunch session was on LFA in Project Society with fewer drug
management. As different organisations use different
terminologies, participants had some difficulty at first, OUTCOME Increase awareness
Reduction of drug
but the facilitator clarified some of the terminologies Mobile team activities,
and their similarities and differences. Radio broadcasting OUTPUTS
ACTIVITIES Mobile team in school formed and trained
The exercise on Results Chain was highly Radio training and production
appreciated by the participants. What the group Funds, staff, stakeholders
realised was unless we analyse the problems and
objectives logically, we can begin designing the
ELD training on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 95
project hierarchy from goal, which leads to confusion, illogical sequences and describing the
hierarchy upside down.
The session on designing indicators on various aspects of a project intervention was a very useful
exercise for participants. It made them aware of the different types of indicators and the
implications on Monitoring and Evaluation.
Happy about … Concerned about …
• Practical exercises • Training is perfect
• Logical framework • No need to evaluate. Keep it up
• Empowerment circle
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 - 11 -
The final day was an intensive and
useful day in many respects. PM&E Plan: Group Work
Animated slides on the various
stages of Environmental Scanning Key
and the sharing of one example from Evaluation Evaluation Data Key Facilitator When
Aspects Collection Informant
one participatory strategic planning Questions
ensured participants grasped the
essence of this tool. ---
The last session of the day reviewed
the entire course and developed ---
individual action plans on PM&E.
The facilitator presented a format ---
and requested participant to think
how they would like to use the
knowledge and skills from this
training in their field.
Finally the workshop was evaluated and participants were awarded with certificates and given
resource CDs containing slides, photos and supplementary materials.
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 - 12 -
Annexes of Group Work
1 Discussion Design
Topic/Agenda: Evaluation of ELD Training Hall
R.O: Participants come up with suggestions fro ELD to improve its hall
E.O: The participants feel that they have contributed in improving their training hall
What did you notice when you come into the hall for the first time?
What are the facilities do you observed?
What is the capacity of this hall?
What do you like and dislike about this hall?
How do you feel when you are sitting in this hall?
How would you arrange it differently and why?
What changes would you like to see and why?
What suggestions and recommendations would you like to provide to ELD?
Topic/Agenda: Community peace building
R.O: Identify the role of youth in community peace building
E.O: The participants realise that they have crucial role to play
What are you doing in community peace building?
What groups are affected by this conflict?
How would you see the relationship between youth and conflict?
What do you think youth have lost during last ten years?
Who do you think has the prominent role in peace building?
How can youth contribute in community peace building?
Where to start from?
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 - 13 -
2 Workshop Method Practical
Focus Question: What roles can youth play in community peace building?
Campaign and Advocacy and Leadership Monitor HR Reconstruction
procession awareness development violation
Formulate Media advocacy Taking leadership Monitor human Reconstruction of
pressure group for peace building roles in resolving right violation by infrastructure
for peace building conflict in their the conflicting
Awareness community parties Resource
Interaction raising on mobilisation for
programs at constitution Playing role rural
different levels assembly model of peace development
Organising peace Performing street
processions dramas that carry Bringing people
peace message together across
Formation of dividing lines
community peace Competition on
Youth campaign topics
development Educating people
in the community
ways of solving
Report on training course on Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, Kathmandu, August 2006 - 14 -