25
Feb

Implementing CoLMEAL: Key Benefits & Considerations

Community-led Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (CoLMEAL) can offer wonderful opportunities for capacity-building, improved engagement and participation, among other major benefits, but the approach also comes with some important considerations and limitations.  In our experience, some of the most important benefits and considerations are as follows:

Benefits of CoLMEAL

  • Keeps information in the hands of those whose lives are directly affected: CoLMEAL provides space for key community stakeholders to lead and engage in MEAL processes, not as objects of observation or respondents, but as subjects and active drivers in MEAL design, data collection, analysis and dissemination. Data is not collected by “outsiders” based on highly technical indicators that are rarely presented back to communities. It is the community that chooses what is important to measure, share and act on. Experience shows that the self-esteem, confidence and skills of individuals are strengthened as they engage in the capacity building process. The CoLMEAL groups learn skills in evaluative thinking and adaptive management that can be applied to any issue they prioritize with stakeholders. Communities own the information collected about them and are inspired and have the confidence to implement community-led initiatives independently.
  • Supports good governance and accountability principles: a strong stakeholder analysis is a foundational step to planning for CoLMEAL. Key community stakeholders become more aware of who holds power, who has vested interests in the project and to intentionally engage those that are marginalized and vulnerable, such as women or minorities, who may not have their voices heard in the broader community. Marginalized and vulnerable community members have the opportunity to influence the design and delivery of projects through regular reviews of CoLMEAL findings and proposing recommendations. Partnerships between state actors and other community stakeholders are strengthened through CoLMEAL. Local accountability mechanisms are also integral to the CoLMEAL process.
  • Promotes evidence-based policy development and decision-making: Government entities are able to gain context specific data that is presented by those who live in the communities they govern. It can fill the void of information for policy implementation and local decision-making that exists in many contexts. CoLMEAL groups can also use the information to advocate for improved well-being with their local officials. CoLMEAL makes information accessible so people at all levels can make informed decisions that affect their own life and those in the community, whether it is an adolescent/youth, caregiver, educator, health care provider, or local government official.
  • Is cost-effective in achieving sustainable impact: CoLMEAL leverages existing community resources and motivation rather than hiring staff and enumerators who are often external to the context. If the aim of MEAL is for the community to make sense of data and take action, CoLMEAL shortcuts the process and goes further than traditional MEAL practice where communities often do not understand the indicators, how they are measured or what the results mean. Applying CoLMEAL can expedite behaviour change, spark local advocacy, and mobilize communities to lead social change initiatives, which are increasingly already a part of program approaches. Similar to feminist MEAL approaches, CoLMEAL can be seen as the missing component to really ground sustainable development approaches.

Case Study: Community-Led Integrated Monitoring and Baseline (CLIMB) process

In a pilot project called the Community-Led Integrated Monitoring and Baseline (CLIMB) process, World Vision was able to build the MEAL capacity of community groups that were mobilized around areas that contributed to improved Child Well-Being, such as education, maternal, child and newborn health and nutrition, livelihoods and water, sanitation and hygiene. The groups designed their own MEAL system, collected and analyzed data and presented it to their local government officials.

Examples of how this process catalyzed development:

1. Farmers improved their livelihoods by applying the concepts of monitoring for the expected change at different steps in their farming practices.
2. A community education team conducted a small survey to find out that only 70% of parents and caregivers valued education in their community and immediately developed a sensitization campaign to address this gap.
3. The high levels of malnutrition led the local health department to commit to creating a nutrition centre in the community.
4. The government adopted monitoring forms developed by the local community WASH group into a publication that was used beyond that community.
5. The government committed to support a local school that was mobilized by the community when they saw that none of the students were graduating grade 7.

Key considerations for the CoLMEAL approach

While there are many positive benefits in both the process and outcomes in relation to Community-Led MEAL, there are also some important considerations for organizations to understand, mitigate and plan for in relation this approach. Based on our experience, we are sharing some of the key issues to consider before going on this journey.

  • Requires a new way of thinking about quality of data: Prevalent concepts of data quality prioritize accuracy and reliability. Significant amounts of resources can be spent trying to ensure data has minimal margins of error without considering the cost-benefit in terms of use, especially by those most affected by programs.  CoLMEAL aims to build upon and strengthen data collection systems that are already in place within communities, thus a key concern for CoLMEAL is whether community members have the “proper” skills, knowledge and systems to effectively collect and analyze data from projects. Often, local community efforts are deemed not “good enough” for donor reporting, and the data quality from communities that have a low level of literacy and numeracy may also be questioned. Contexts where CoLMEAL has been successfully piloted show that the MEAL tools for data collection and analysis can be designed for varying levels of literacy and numeracy. Moreover, ensuring communities actually learn and use the data from MEAL can lead to an improvement and investment from communities in data quality – since data validation is inherent in the CoLMEAL approach. If designed well- together with project MEAL system – CoLMEAL data can provide data that is acceptable for project, organizational and donors accountability. However, it requires all involved to change their mindset about who the data is for and how they can use it to catalyze sustainable impact.
  • Requires a different way of thinking about aggregation of data: Current MEAL philosophy and practice tends to value comparative quantitative measurements (numbers and percentages) and requires a certain type of methodological and statistical rigour that is often defined by technical specialists. With CoLMEAL, the data collected tends to be very specific to the community level and the tools and questions designed are unique to that community. CoLMEAL provides rich detailed information that reflects the complexity and intersectionality of particular communities, and can be highly valuable at the community level. There is a common perception that this creates a tension with the needs of organizations and donors who wish to aggregate the data and compare data across multiple contexts in order to effectively report on impact and showcase results for better branding, funding and sustainability. This requires a different approach to making sense of the data at a country or program level and to compare across contexts.
  • Requires time, budget and strong buy-in from community members and implementing organizations: The time to set up a robust CoLMEAL system (which includes local CoLMEAL groups and initial community engagement) can take 10-12 months and may require additional staff members dedicated to managing and guiding the process at the local level. This set up during the first year of the project can also conflict with other project start-up activities, especially traditional MEAL practices. This can put added strain on local staff and key community stakeholders if not planned for in advance and needs to be appropriately budgeted for to ensure its success.  In the current donor environment, organizations will likely need to conduct traditional MEAL activities alongside CoLMEAL set up. In this case, it is essential to include a CoLMEAL officer who is responsible for keeping the steps moving in order to ensure the community is able to sustain CoLMEAL within the timeframe of the project life span.  Ideally, as donors and organizations become more committed to the principles of CoLMEAL, it can become the foundation of the project MEAL system with the organization only collecting additional data as needed.
  • Can reinforce existing power dynamics if not facilitated well: Without a strong understanding of the existing power dynamics in the community, there can be a tendency for community stakeholders to select those who are chosen to oversee and lead the CoLMEAL process from the same traditional power-holders, community elites, empowered leaders and opinion-makers, rather than those who are from marginalized and vulnerable groups. This is why Salanga incorporates a stakeholder power analysis and gender analysis into the CoLMEAL planning process and also puts in place practices and supports so that more vulnerable community members are effectively able to engage.

Example: Gender-Based Violence

In a multi-country program, there can be multiple types of gender-based violence (GBV) that are prevalent in any given context and these can differ amongst the different countries targeted by the program. Having one metric or indicator that tries to measure the change across all these countries – for all the different types of GBV – can be a meaningless exercise as the change in the mean or average does not express the true impact of the program.

However, if the metric measures the proportion of target communities where the most prevalent incidences of GBV are decreasing, a process can be designed for community stakeholders to monitor the levels of relevant GBV types in their community and how they are shifting over time. At the macro level, organizations and donors would also have more meaningful conversations about whether the situation is improving in the majority of target communities or not.


Overall, CoLMEAL can be an important means and ends to social justice and to effective community development. And there are important benefits and considerations for organizations and communities interested in this approach.

Want to learn more? Stay-tuned for our next post. Join our mailing list below or follow us on LinkedIn so you don’t miss the next update!

If you have any questions about CoLMEAL leave them at the bottom of this post, or join our discussion on LinkedIn!

Read the CoLMEAL article series

  1. CoLMEAL: What is it and should you use it.
  2. Why CoLMEAL can help development
  3. Is your organization ready for CoLMEAL? (coming soon)

You are donating to : Greennature Foundation

How much would you like to donate?
$10 $20 $30
Would you like to make regular donations? I would like to make donation(s)
How many times would you like this to recur? (including this payment) *
Name *
Last Name *
Email *
Phone
Address
Additional Note
paypalstripe
Loading...