Defining Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning in the context of Organisational Development support – Top 6 learnings

Throughout 2023, the Organisational Development Community of Practice hosted a range of sessions that delved into the broader philanthropy ecosystem. They covered analysing the evolving power dynamics between grantmakers and grantees, or integrating a wellbeing lens and, consequently, foundations are recognising the transformative potential of OD support. Building upon these discussions, the Community of Practice is now looking to focus on specific areas of support for partners.

The OD Community organised an online event on the topic of “Defining Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning in the Context of Organisational Development Support” on the 12 October 2023. The session bridged the subject of OD with Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL), a pairing that can be viewed in two ways: either considering MEL as a form of OD support or examining the MEL of OD support itself. The session delved deeper into discussions on the language of MEL in the context of OD support, particularly as philanthropy increasingly seeks to move beyond linear impact measurement models.

This report details the top six learnings that came out of this, with the purpose of creating a repository of learnings that can be used as a resource by the Community of Practice but also wider philanthropic community.

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) as a practice is being reflected upon

Overall, foundations are moving away from a focus on compliance to a greater emphasis on learning in addition to abandoning linear ways of measurement. In fact, every stage of a support intervention is being reflected upon. To add to this, trust-based approaches are now being favoured as well as holding a discussion on who truly has agency when it comes to “learning.” In terms of organisational development, there is now an effort to identify who is learning and how this can also be woven into OD support. An example is developing MEL tools with partners directly.

“Learning” is an action-orientated term

It is now becoming more widely understood that “learning” is an active undertaking, something which should also be adopted by all members of a foundation team. In other words, it is mindset. In the case of OD, learning does not have to be an occasional occurrence, but rather a continuous effort that is integrated into OD support programmes.

Identifying the goals of OD support can assist in defining its measurement

OD support takes many different forms (as noted in learning 1, in the document: Organisational Development Support: A Rough Guide – Top Eight Learnings). This also concerns the language of OD, and how it differs from foundation to foundation. To truly define measurement in OD, a step back is required to properly define the goals of the support. An example could be supporting a partner with financial capacity: why was this specific type of support offered, and was it the result of a strategic decision or after consultation with the partner? Many foundations are currently looking at how to measure the impact of OD support, and identifying the goals (which can be set at different levels, as seen on page 13 of the report “Funding Organisational Development: a smart investment to multiply impact : Views from five Foundations”) will allow opportunities for foundations to identify ways of measuring their impact.

Learning questions should be clearly adopted in light of any MEL process of OD support

These learning questions should not be static, standard questions but rather be developed in collaboration with partners. They can be embedded throughout the provision of OD support and are ever-evolving as part of an iterative process. It is also dependent on and subjective to the foundation, as regards their maturity in providing OD support. A consideration for a funder who has just begun to offer OD, for example, is that they may require more evidence to relay to their governance structures to ensure the continuation of this form of support to partners.

We need to challenge assumptions that foundations have on what is considered to be a resilient organisation

This can also concern what changes are feasible (in the short, medium and long term) in proportion to the support we give. An example of challenging these preconceptions include: is our idea of good governance the same as our partner’s, in addition to our board’s/colleagues’ internally? As foundations continue to embark on an exercise of self-reflection, this exercise is vital so as not to perpetuate existing manifestations of power dynamics.

Taking a holistic, proportional role to the MEL of OD support is a key rule

Various small actions can be taken to ensure effective measurement of OD support. This can be from involving partners in the fostering of frameworks, such as the identification of learning questions of the constituencies that are served. This can also mean taking the opportunity to share and link information throughout the partnership (such as catch-up calls) and making sure that learning does go both ways. Existing materials can also be relied upon in addition to peer learning opportunities amongst funders.