Introduction to monitoring and evaluation

IOM is considered an efficient organization with extensive field presence, implementing its many interventions through a large and decentralized network of regional offices and country offices.1 IOM puts a strong focus on results-based management ( RBM ), which is promoted to strengthen organizational effectiveness and move towards evidence-based and results-focused programming.

• 1For the purpose of the IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines, the term intervention is used interchangeably for either a project, programme, strategy or a policy

A results-based approach requires robust monitoring and evaluation ( M&E ) systems that provide government officials, IOM staff, partners, donors and civil society with better means to the following:

• Inform decision-making by providing timely feedback to management on intervention context, risks, challenges, results, as well as successful approaches;
• Meet accountability obligations by informing donors, beneficiaries and other stakeholders on IOM’s performance, progress made in the achievement of results and the utilization of resources; 2
• Draw lessons learned from experience to provide feedback into the planning, design and implementation of future interventions and improve service delivery.

M&E, at times, may seem challenging in the context of IOM’s interventions, where project duration may not be “long enough” to incorporate strong M&E, or where security, time pressure, funding and/or capacity constraints may hinder the rigorous implementation of M&E. For the same reasons, the benefits of M&E may go unrecognized already in the proposal writing stage, resulting in insufficient attention given to it. The IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines is a good opportunity to correct those impressions and put M&E at the centre of sound performance and fulfilling the duty of accountability.

As IOM’s global role in addressing migration-related challenges has diversified and expanded, new political and organizational realities have demanded a different conceptualization of M&E, as well as reframed organizational thinking about what it constitutes and its application. These realities include the numerous operational demands, limited resources, accelerated speed of expected response and immediate visibility for impact and accountability, as well as the expected rapid integration of new organizational concepts, such as “value for money” and Theory of Change into daily work. Learning and information-sharing also channel a number of key messages and recommendations to be considered.

IOM’s internal and external environments have also undergone significant changes in recent years, with an increased focus on migration worldwide. As a United Nations-related agency, IOM is a main reference on migration, supporting the attainment of migration-related commitments of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs) and contributing to the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. IOM is also an increasingly important contributor to migration data and analysis on a global scale, including for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, and is praised for its operational and pragmatic approach to managing migration, in line with its mandate and the Migration Governance Framework ( MiGOF ). Furthermore, IOM is internally guided by the Strategic Vision, which does not supersede IOM’s existing MIGOF. But while MIGOF sets out a set of objectives and principles, it does not set out a focused direction of travel. The Strategic Vision is intended to do this. The Strategic Vision also intends to strengthen IOM’s capacity to contribute to the SDGs or the Global Compact for Migration, as well as other existing cooperative frameworks. This chapter will provide an overview of both monitoring and evaluation as key components and an overview of RBM at IOM; it will also outline the differences between monitoring and evaluation and explain how M&E together are relevant to IOM’s strategic approach and objectives.

• 2For the purpose of the IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines, IOM uses the OECD/DAC definition of beneficiary/ies or people that the Organization seeks to assist as “the individuals, groups, or organisations, whether targeted or not, that benefit directly or indirectly, from the development intervention. Other terms, such as rights holders or affected people, may also be used.” See OECD, 2019, p. 7. The term beneficiary/ies or people that IOM seeks to assist, will intermittently be used throughout the IOM Monitoring and Evaluation Guidelines, and refers to the definition given above, including when discussing humanitarian context.