This is an assessment report relating to UNICEF Vietnam's communication campaign as part of the global “END Violence against Children” initiative.
It was an early example of trying to implement the approach outlined in the C4D Evaluation Framework in practice. Researchers associated with the Evaluating C4D research partnership with UNICEF collaborated with the UNICEF Vietnam C4D team, the government counterpart, and the consultant.
The following information was provided to BetterEvaluation by Jessica Noske-Turner as part of the Evaluating C4D Resource Hub.
The Evaluating C4D Resource Hub sits within BetterEvaluation and houses a growing collection of the available guides, toolkits, tools and methods to use for research monitoring and evaluation (R,M&E) of Communication for Development (C4D) initiatives. The Hub is structured around two combined frameworks:
C4D Evaluation Framework (represented by the circle) is an approach. It describes the values and principles that guide our decisions in C4D.
The BetterEvaluation Rainbow Framework (represented by the rainbows) is a structure. It organises the practical tasks into seven categories or 'clusters' and provides options.
While the resource recommendation below discusses the resource specifically in relation to its usefulness for evaluating C4D within the Evaluating C4D Resource Hub's C4D Framework, this resource may also be of use for people working in other contexts and with different frameworks.
Authors and their affiliation
Consultant: Dinh Thi Thanh Hoa
Commissioned by the Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs (MOLISA), UNICEF Vietnam, undertaken with support from RMIT University and University of Hyderabad
This study was a unique opportunity to focus on the effectiveness and contributions from the C4D initiatives associated with the campaign. Violence against children is a difficult program area in which to evaluate outcomes and impacts due to the sensitivity and secrecy surrounding practices. The study provided an opportunity to try more innovative methods alongside traditional methods. Engaging data collection methods were used to work with children under 16 during household interviews using Communicative Ecology, and Critical Listening and Feedback sessions as guiding methods.
How have you used or intend on using this resource?
This example has been generated as part of a research project in collaboration with UNICEF C4D to improve R,M&E. It is a good example of how Communicative Ecology Mapping and Critical Listening and Feedback Sessions can be incorporated into more traditional M&E approaches to provide a deeper contextual understanding of communication, meaning and voice. This may be used as a model for others.
Why would you recommend it to other people?
This example is in keeping with the C4D Evaluation Framework in the following ways:
- participatory: the Communicative Ecology Mapping approach was adapted to be more engaging and accessible for children and young people to actively engage in mapping processes (participation as data sources).
- realistic: the budget for the assessment was relatively small at $4000 + the Daily Subsistence Allowance. Several carefully considered changes needed to be made to reduce the scope while maintaining the integrity of the assessment. It is a good example of how to achieve a useful assessment on a small budget.
- critical: the review process, where MOLISA and UNICEF commented on a draft report, identified issues such as the overuse of evidence from government officials and an under-representation of data from households, and areas where statements were generic and lacked supportive evidence. This feedback informed the final draft.
Future initiatives using this example as a model could consider strengthening the following aspects:
- learning-based: the consultant was experienced in R,M&E and was confident in her approaches. In this small initiative and due to the nature of the consultancy relationship it was difficult to introduce very different approaches to R,M&E. For this longer-term capacity building would be required.
- realistic: the amount of time it took to do the assessment was longer than estimated. Although it was a small study in terms of budget, the length of time required was in keeping with average evaluation initiatives, since many of the processes involved (recruitment of a consultant, finding time to meet with stakeholders, finalising the report) are similar.
- complexity: the scale of the assessment, as well as issues such as a lack of a baseline, meant that questions relating to contribution of C4D to behaviour and attitude change were not feasible within the scope of the assessment. A different design, with different data collection and analysis methods would have been required. (See Check the results support causal attribution (strategy 2) and Investigate possible alternative explanations (strategy 3) for ideas).
Dinh H. (December 2015). An Assessment of the Viet Nam National Communication Campaign to End Violence against Children (EVAC). UNICEF Vietnam.
'EVAC Assessment' is referenced in:
- Communication for Development (C4D) :