Although tracking progress towards results, it is not sufficient to measure higher-level impacts on income and well-being of beneficiaries, or to glean lessons learned from implementation that can be applied to future interventions. Consequently, evaluations of projects and activities, either individually or in sensible combinations, are important to provide deeper measurement of results.

MCA-N tailors the methodology for each evaluation to what is feasible for the activity under examination, but strives to use the most rigorous quantitative method possible within that activity's particular implementation context. In particular, it is important, when it is feasible, to conduct impact evaluations that employ a quantitative approach to measure results against a counterfactual – that is, what would have happened in the absence of the project or activity. Measuring results experienced by beneficiaries against a counterfactual scenario (usually a comparison group of statistically similar individuals) allows the net impact to be calculated quantitatively, and prevents overestimates of results, since individuals who are not beneficiaries of MCA-N activities may still see improvements in their living situation due to other factors.

In the course of Compact/Programme development, Namibia identified its constraints to development and tailored the MCA-N Programme to address those constraints. This means that the Programme should help unlock the country's development potential – and, from the very beginning, indicators were identified and targets established that would help us assess whether this potential was indeed being unlocked.

The findings of the surveys and evaluations are highlighted in the documents below but full reports can be accessed by e-mailing info@mcanamibia.org.

Related documents:

CBRLM evaluation and related data collection –
CBRLM Household Survey and Cattle Assessment (baseline) 2012.03.01 (presented by IPA on February 14, 2012)