In developing countries, an increasing number of civil society organizations (CSOs) engage in independent monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of government programs and policies. Most CSOs rely on a range of M&E tools in combination with advocacy strategies to hold government accountable and improve the implementation of programs and policies. Despite the popularity of such initiatives, their effectiveness and impact remain unconfirmed and are not well understood. In addition, little is known about the influence of this type of CSO-led M&E at the district level. Using a case study design, the current research provides a map of the different influence mechanisms that occurred following the M&E of the National Health Insurance by Ghanaian CSOs. The research further suggests that the built-in dialogue space is acting as a catalyst for certain influence mechanisms.
AbdulaiA. G.CrawfordB. (2010). Consolidating democracy in Ghana: Progress and prospects?Democratization, 17, 26–67.
2.
BjörkmanM.SvenssonJ. (2009). Power to the people: Evidence from a randomized field experiment on community-based monitoring in Uganda. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124, 735–769.
3.
BrandonP. R.SinghJ. M. (2009). The strength of the methodological warrants for the findings of research on program evaluation use. American Journal of Evaluation, 30, 123–157.
4.
CardenF. (2009). Knowledge to policy? Making the most of development research. Ottawa, Canada: Sage and IDRC.
5.
ChristieC. A. (2007). Reported influence of evaluation data on decision maker’s actions: An empirical examination. American Journal of Evaluation, 28, 8–25.
6.
CornwallA.CoelhoV. S. (2007). Space for change? The politics of citizen participation in new democratic arenas. London, England: Zed Books.
7.
CourtJ.YoungJ. (2003). Bridging research and policy: Insights from 50 case studies (Working Paper, Vol. 213). London, England: Overseas Development Institute.
8.
CrawfordG. (2009). Making democracy a reality? The politics of decentralisation and the limits to local democracy in Ghana. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 27, 57–83.
9.
FiankorD. K.AkussahH. (2012). Information use and policy decision making by district assembly members in Ghana. Information Development, 28, 32–42.
10.
FleischerD. N.ChristieC. A. (2009). Evaluation use results from a survey of US American evaluation association members. American Journal of Evaluation, 30, 158–175.
11.
GeorgeA. L.BennettA. (2005). Case studies and theory development. In GeorgeA. L.BennettA. (Eds.), Case studies and theory development in the social sciences (pp. 3–36). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
GildemynM. (2011). Towards an understanding of civil society organisations’ involvement in monitoring and evaluation. Unpacking the accountability and feedback function of M&E. IOB discussion paper 2011.03. Antwerp, Belgium: University of Antwerp, Institute of Development Policy and Management.
13.
GoetzA. M.JenkinsR. (2001). Hybrid forms of accountability. Citizen engagement in institutions of public-sector oversight in India. Public Management Review, 3, 363–383.
14.
Gyimah-BoadiE. (2009). Another step forward for Ghana. Journal of Democracy, 20, 138–152.
15.
HenryG. T.MarkM. M. (2003). Beyond use: Understanding evaluation’s influence on attitudes and actions. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 293–314.
16.
HickeyS.MohanG. (2008). The politics of establishing pro-poor accountability: What can poverty reduction strategies achieve?Review of International Political Economy, 15, 234–258.
17.
JoshiA.HoutzagerP. P. (2012). Widgets or watchdogs?Public Management Review, 14, 145–162.
18.
KathyolaJ.JobO. (2011). Decentralisation in Ghana. In KathyolaJ.OluwatoyinJ. (Eds.), Decentralisation in commonwealth Africa. Experiences from Botswana, Cameroon, Ghana, Mozambique and Tanzania (pp. 89–138). London, England: Commonwealth Secretariat.
19.
KirkhartK. E. (2000). Reconceptualizing evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. New Directions for Evaluation, 88, 5–23.
KopeckyP. (2011). Political competition and party patronage: Public appointments in Ghana and South Africa. Political Studies, 59, 713–732.
22.
LehtonenM. (2012). Indicators as an appraisal technology: Framework for analysing the policy influence of the UK energy sector indicators. In Von RaggambyA.RubikF. (Eds.), Sustainable development, evaluation and policy-making: Theory, practise and quality assurance (pp. 175–208). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar Publishing.
23.
LevitonL. C.HughesE. F. X. (1981). Research on the utilization of evaluations: A review and synthesis. Evaluation Review, 5, 525–548.
24.
LuC.-J.ShulmanS. W. (2008). Rigor and flexibility in computer-based qualitative research: Introducing the coding analysis toolkit. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 2, 105–117.
25.
LucasH.EvansD.PasteurK. (2004). Research on the current state of PRS monitoring systems (Vol. 382. IDS Discussion Paper). Brighton, England: Brighton Institute of Development Studies.
26.
MarkM. M. (2006). The consequences of evaluation: Theory, research and practice. Presidential address. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Portland, OR.
27.
MarkM. M. (2011). Toward better research on—And thinking about—Evaluation influence, especially in multisite evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation, 2011, 107–119.
28.
MarkM. M.HenryG. T. (2004). The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence. Evaluation, 10, 35–57.
29.
MarkM. M.HenryG. T. (2012). Multiple routes. Evaluation, assisted sensemaking and pathways to betterment. In AlkinM. C. (Ed.), Evaluation roots: A wider perspective of theorists’ views and influences (pp. 144–156). London, England: Sage.
30.
MarkM. M.HenryG. T.JulnesG. (2000). Evaluation. An integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
31.
McGeeR.GaventaJ. (2011). Shifting power? Assessing the impact of transparency and accountability initiatives(IDS Working Paper No. 383). Retrieved fromhttp://www.ids.ac.uk/files/dmfile/Wp383.pdf
32.
McNeilM.MalenaC. (2010). Demanding good governance. Lessons from social accountability initiatives in Africa. Washington, DC: World Bank.
33.
Ministry of Health Ghana. (2007). The Ghana health sector programme of work 2008. Accra, Ghana: Government of Ghana.
34.
Ministry of Health Ghana. (2011). Independent review: Health sector programme of work 2010. Accra, Ghana: Government of Ghana.
35.
NewellP.BellourS. (2002). Mapping accountability: Origins, contexts and implications for development (IDS Working PaperVol. 168). Brighton, England: Institute of Development Studies.
36.
PattonM. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
PeruzzottiE.SmulovitzC. (2006). Social accountability: An introduction. In PeruzottiE.SmulovitzC. (Eds.), Enforcing the rule of law. Social accountability in the new Latin American democracies (pp. 3–33). Pittsburg, CA: University of Pittsburg Press.
38.
PreskillH.CaracelliV. (1997). Current and developing conceptions of use: Evaluation use TIG survey results. Evaluation Practice, 18, 209–225.
39.
RenoR. R.CialdiniR. B.KallgrenC. A. (1993). The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 104–112.
40.
Republic of Ghana. (2009). The implementation of the growth and poverty reduction strategy (GPRS II) 2006-2009. The 2008 Annual Progress Report. Accra, Ghana: National Development Planning Commission.
41.
Republic of Ghana. (2011). The implementation of the Ghana shared growth and development agenda (GSGDA) 2010-2013. 2010 Annual Progress Report. Accra, Ghana: National Development Planning Commission.
42.
Rocha MenocalA.SharmaB. (2008). Joint evaluation of citizens’ voice and accountability: Synthesis report. London, England: Department for International Development.
43.
RubensteinJ. (2007). Accountability in an unequal world. The Journal of Politics, 69, 616–632.
44.
RyanG. W.BernardR. H. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15, 85–109.
45.
SchedlerA. (1999). Conceptualizing accountability. In SchedlerA.DiamondL.PlattnerM. F. (Eds.), The self-restraining state. Power and accountability in new democracies (pp. 13–28). London, England: Lyne Rienner.
46.
SEND-Ghana. (2010). Balancing access with quality healthcare: An assessment of the NHIS in Ghana (2004-2008). Accra, Ghana: Author.
47.
ShulaL. M.CousinsJ. B. (1997). Evaluation use: Theory, research and practice since 1986. Evaluation Practice, 18, 195–208.
48.
ValovirtaV. (2002). Evaluation utilization as argumentation. Evaluation, 8, 60–80.
49.
WeissC. H. (1977). Research for policy’s sake—Enlightenment function of social researchPolicy Analysis, 3, 531–545.
50.
WeissC. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39, 426–431.
51.
WeissC. H.Murphy-GrahamE.BirkelandS. (2005). An alternate route to policy influence: How evaluations affect D.A.R.E. American Journal of Evaluation, 26, 12–30.
52.
YinR. K. (2009). Case study research. Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
