Evidence and Impact Group - Alliance Priority 1
To: Radhika, Patrick, Hope and Kama,
cc Others on the Interim Group that met in Baltimore
Hi - this note focuses on Alliance priority 1 - Evidence and Impact. My notes from Baltimore indicate that ICA, ISMA and USAID were interested in acting as a sub-grouo to commence the work on the Evidence and Impact priority of the Alliance. As with the Policy note just sent if others wish to join the process at this stage that would be excellent. These are the suggested steps:
1. I have attached the Alliance overview paper (click "Please click to review, comment and access any attachments" above).
2. Could I please ask you to review page 8 - Appendix A: 12-month plan – Evidence and Impact.
3. If you can respond by email or using the comments process online outlining your ideas to amend and strengthen that strategy that would also be excellent - a deadline of Wednesday 7th March
4. Propose that we convene a call on this priority. As an initial suggestion Wednesday, March 14th at 10-30am to 11-30am EST.
5. The intended outcome from the written inputs and the conference call will be (a) strengthening of the Evidence and Impact strategy and (b) clarity on roles, responsibilities and timelines.
6. On receiving your written comments I will undertake an initial re-draft of the evidence and impact strategy so that we have a more up-to-date document to review in the conference call.
By way of possibly helpful background we undertook an exercise here to try and identify some compelling data from the 3,000 plus research “items” summarized on The Communication Initiative platform. We adopted a rather random set of topics as you will see from below. At each link relative to that topic you will see a series of boxes with a sumamry description of the research undertaken and some highlights results for t6 to 12 research initiatives under each theme. The intent is for this to be a helpful starting point for the tasks to be undertaken by this Evidence and Impact Group.
Please note that there is no through methodology here - just a review of what we have and the inclusion of research initiatives and the impact data from those initiatives that has an initial feel for being compelling. We have made no comment or assessment of the research quality. There was a deliberate focus on finding imapct data that (a) directly relates to change on a development priority and (b) has some quantifiable data/figures/numbers. As you will see when lookng at below we have edited these to very brief summaries.
Below is for your review: (a quick note re dates - some of these we have been buildling, revising and amending over the years, others are new, whoch is why you will see a range of publication dates).
Impact Examples: Girls' and Women's Empowerment
Impact Examples: Child Health Communication Programming
Impact Examples: Natural Resource Management (NRM) Communication Programming
Impact Examples: Media Development Programming
Impact Examples: Polio Communication Programming
Impact Examples: ICT4D Programming
Impact Examples: Early Child Development Communication Programming
Impact Examples: Democracy and Governance Communication Programming
Comments
Draft Implementation Plan - Alliance Evidence Priority
Rafael, Radhika, Patrick - Thanks for meeting today to map out the Alliance implementation steps on the very important Evidence priority. Below I have attempted to capture the key next steps points that we agreed. Please check that below is an accurate summary of what was agreed. Others - though at this stage this is primarily for Rafael, Radikha, Patrick (who participated), Hope and Kama (who are also on this group but could not participate today), if you have any questions or ideas please let us know through the comments facility or by email reply.
All of below is designed as a first implementation page step for the strategy agreed in Baltimore - see page 8 of the Architecture document.
1. Criteria
That for the selection of the compelling evidence we work to the following criteria
a. Peer review journal published or book chapter or substantive published paper
b. Results draws a direct connection between a social change, behaviour change, communication for development or media development strategy, action or trend; and, positive change in relation to one or more Sustainable Development Goals.
c. Research was undertaken through a solid research methodology, with a bias towards methodologies that have comparative data at the centre of that methodology.
2. Collection of possible candidates for the 20 compelling pieces of data
That as an initial step we take the following bite-size “chunks”. These steps are also designed to support the building of the Alliance itself. They will heighten engagement, build identity and connection with the Alliance, and be a concrete “product” that can be shared and used in a number of different fora by all participating organizations in the Alliance.
a. That each participating organisation in the Alliance is asked to recommend the 3 to 5 research papers, articles or chapters that contain what they regard as compelling data that meets the criteria above. Those papers, articles, book chapters etc could be either their own research work and/or research work undertaken by others that they find particularly compelling. (April)
b. As part of that selection process, in order to cross-fertilise the Alliance’s evidence and policy engagement priorities, participating organizations in the Alliance will be asked to pay particular attention to any evidence that may related to the SDGs that are the focus for the next meeting of the High Level Political Forum (July 2018). The overall theme is ‘Transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies’. This will involve a focus on this sub-set of the SDGs: SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation); SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy); SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities); SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production); and. SDG 15 (life on land). (We will repeat this process for the HLPF process in 2019 where the focus is more in synch with our field, namely this theme “'Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality”). (April)
c. The Evidence sub-group of the Alliance (which will be expanded when the Alliance is up and running) will review the submissions from the participating organizations in the Alliance and seek clarifications, ask questions, etc. (May)
d. From that process the Evidence sub-group will make a preliminary choice of 20 compelling pieces of data for submission back to the full Alliance Group for their debate, amendment and agreement. (May)
The steps above will be the initial work related to the first product: A 2 page distillation of the results with the most compelling data.
e. The Alliance participating organisations will then agree a small, balanced (geography, field of work, development issue, gender, etc) group of people who will be supported to consider the data in those papers and develop the outline of the requirement for Product 2 as outlined in the . (June)
f. The results of the work by that group will be placed before the full set of Alliance organizations for their review, comment and amendment.
g. That outline will then be passed to a writer or writers in order to complete Product 2.
This will complete the first step related to Product 2: A 4 page outline of the strategic implications from that data.
h. There would then be full communication of those two products and …
i. … the work completed could be used by the Policy Engagement group within the Alliance.
Questions?
1. Does above fairly reflect our discussion and conclusion?
2. Anything to add or remove?
3. Any further thoughts?
Thanks
- Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios