Building sport for development practitioners’ capacity for undertaking monitoring and evaluation – reflections on a training programme building capacity in realist evaluation

Abstract

At present, the quality and practice of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) in Sport for Development (SfD) projects is under close scrutiny, mainly concerning the capacity that sport has to create social change. Critics have argued that a deeper understanding of 'what works for whom and why' is required when evaluating SfD projects. This paper explores practitioner involvement in M&E, drawing upon a 'realist participatory M&E training framework' developed to train student sport development practitioners to make sense of how and why their SfD projects worked. The training framework was evaluated utilizing a realist approach to understand what approaches to evaluation worked for those involved in the training framework. Specifically, 15 practitioners participated in the training framework encompassing 5 community focused SfD innovation projects delivered within the Coaching Innovation Programme at a south coast university in the United Kingdom. The realist evaluation incorporated Q-method factor analysis with realist interviews and reflective blogs. Findings on the value of realist evaluation for practitioners emerged. Practical and transformational evaluation characteristics unfolded and four groups of practitioners emerged depicting how the training framework worked. These groups were 'new and emerging evaluators', 'polished problem solvers', 'passive passengers', and 'proficient yet sceptical practitioners'. These were underpinned by holistic narratives in line with Q-method demonstrating shared viewpoints about the training framework. In conclusion, participatory approaches of M&E can work with practitioners and should be embedded to enable application of realist evaluation.

Loneliness and social isolation interventions for older adults: a scoping review of reviews

“…Complex interventions have several interconnecting parts and it is recognised that the evaluation of this type of interventions should go beyond the question of effectiveness to identify 'mechanisms' of action which can be described as the resources offered through an intervention and the way that people respond to those resources (for example, how do resources intersect with participant's beliefs, reasoning, attitude, ideas and opportunities?) [80,81]. Hence, a realist review may be a more suitable approach to research synthesis when attempting to understand the mechanisms by which complex social interventions work (or not) in particular contexts [62].…”

Mobilising Q methodology within a realist evaluation: Lessons from an empirical study

“…The same approach applies to realist evaluation where the quest to unearth mechanisms is dependent on a rich understanding of the context. Thus, mobilising Q methodology with realist evaluation provides an excellent foundation whereby the concourse activities capture and recognise key elements of the context and provisional programme theory for testing (Harris, 2018).…”

Sport and Peacebuilding in Israel/Palestine

“…The SDP sector has (had to) become better at monitoring and evaluation and identify how they are 'making a difference' (Darnell, 2013;Donnelly, et al, 2011;Harris, 2018;Harris & Adams, 2016;Levermore, 2011;Nicholls, Giles & Sethna, 2010;Webb & Richelieu, 2016). However, for those working on ' sport-for-peace' initiatives there is a lack of consensus on what 'peace'…”