A monitoring plan needs to be guided by the goals and objectives of the VAWG programme, including defining the problem statement/challenge, the risk factors and the type(s) of VAWG being addressed. It needs to align with the overall programme M&E framework which captures the overarching goal, outcomes and outputs of the programme and sets out key information to be collected throughout the programme, together with success metrics and operational benchmarks.

An M&E framework maps out the anticipated relationships between activities, outputs and outcomes, the expected results of the programme as they relate to goals and objectives as well as the theory of change (ToC). It ensures prevention and response interventions have clearly defined questions, indicators, conceptual measures, and methods, and helps establish coordinated reporting tools and mechanisms for incorporating results into prevention and response plannings. The M&E framework also uses baseline data as benchmark information for comparison to measure the starting value of each indicator and whether progress has been achieved against a set target, accounts for underlying assumptions and manages any risks.

See page on how to get started with M&E for the main steps to take when implementing an M&E framework for EVAWG programming.

Monitoring questions should be identified at the outset to guide and agree on what information needs to be collected. They should be supported by a description of indicators (to track and measure this information), its data source/method (where the data comes from), who is responsible for capturing this data, the timeframe for it to be captured, and associated costs.

Monitoring questions can include:

• Are the proposed activities being implemented as expected? Why or why not?
• What VAWG services are provided to whom, when, how often, for how long, and in what context? Health care, psychosocial, legal, socio-economic services, and safety and security services? Are these providers delivering high-quality services? Are the services accessible? Are they appropriate for women and girls/survivors? Is the target population being reached?
• Are the programme activities leading to expected results?
• Do the interventions or assumptions need to be modified?
• Are the programme activities being implemented in a way that is sustainable?

See page on how to capture and share learning for more information on learning questions.

Good indicators are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound (SMART). Each indicator needs a clear definition that describes how it will be monitored in a consistent way and the type of data to be collected (qualitative or quantitative) and how frequently so that results can be compared. Indicators are only as good as the quality of the data used to measure them, so it’s important to consider the context and culture of interventions when designing them. If it’s not feasible to collect data for an indicator, or the data that can be collected are not meaningful, the indicator will have little or no utility.  

See page on how to design indicators to measure change for more information.

Once the indicators to be tracked through regular monitoring have been agreed upon, you need to select the data collection method(s) for each indicator. For primary data collection, consider the unit of analysis (individuals, families, communities, etc.) and how the data will be disaggregated (by gender, age, ethnic groups, locations, etc.). Tools can include pre- and post-test questionnaires, monitoring checklists, participant feedback forms, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, field monitoring visits, monitoring reports, training facilitator surveys, stories etc. These should be accessible or made accessible to different populations, considering factors such as literacy, language, disability, and access to digital tools.

Collecting data can carry potential risks, including unintended consequences of data collection methods and tools, so it’s also important to uphold best practices and the principle of Do No Harm to ensure that monitoring processes are both effective and ethical. These risks can vary by context but may include potential harm to women and girls by creating safety for survivors, limited time to establish trust and rapport with affected populations, and risk of retaliation by perpetrators and/or the community. Read more on how to conduct ethical data collection.

While developing a monitoring plan for a VAWG programme, it is important to also integrate a learning plan (and implement a knowledge management strategy) so that programme teams can understand what is working and what is not, engage in ongoing learning and reflection and make any necessary programme adjustments in real-time. Ideally, the learning plan will map out the learning questions or objectives, channels, formats, frequency, timeframes and resources to analyse monitoring data, to make programme adjustments and to produce and disseminate the knowledge products. 

It is important to set up accessible and inclusive feedback-and-response mechanisms and learning loops within a monitoring system for women, girls and affected communities to provide updates and insights into their priorities and needs as well as identify solutions to adapt programming. Depending on the context, this could include individual/collective feedback loops such as one-on-one or community meetings (see Kyrgyzstan case study below), confidential hotlines, anonymous suggestion boxes, SMS texts, Interactive Voice Response (IVR), social media, etc.

Any key data, learning and actions taken should always be communicated in an accessible way to affected communities to ensure accountability, and to a range of other relevant actors through different channels, including communities of practice, dialogues, learning circles and reflective practice spaces. Ultimately, the learning process should be collaborative, aiming to ensure that beneficiaries and local practitioners not only contribute to monitoring and learning, but also retain ownership of the knowledge they help create, enhancing the overall effectiveness and sustainability. See page on how to capture and share learning for more information.

Monitoring and learning plans should consider the following key components and outline details on:

• Resources: budget, time and trained staff or consultant availability to conduct the activities and implement the plan. This includes funding, technical capacity, equipment, etc.
• Capacity: whether the programme has the internal capacity and processes to carry out the proposed monitoring and learning activities, including data analysis, or if external expertise is required and defining their roles and responsibilities for collecting and managing data. Consider capabilities, such as whether existing systems are able to address the programme’s needs, and the constraints.
• Feasibility: whether the proposed activities are realistic and can be implemented, and that the timeline is realistic.
• Ethics: the ethical considerations and challenges involved with implementing the proposed monitoring and learning activities, and a plan to address these considerations. See page on how to conduct ethical data collection.