Adapting to Change: How Water for Women's MEL System Evolved with Climate Resilience

Winnie is helping collect data on WASH from the people of Wewak, Papua New Guinea

Winnie is participating in MEL activities in her community and gathering data on WASH from the people of Wewak, Papua New Guinea. (Photo: WaterAid/Saskia van Zanen)

 

The Water for Women Fund has undergone a big shift in the past two years to pivot and focus on climate resilience in water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems and services. This has been a significant change for the Fund, building on a dedicated focus on gender equality, disability and social inclusion (GEDSI) in, through and beyond WASH since 2018. In the extension period (2023 – 2024) Water for Women works with 15 WASH implementation projects undertaken by Civil Society Organisation (CSO) partners in addition to seven Research Organisation (RO) partner projects. As we are well into our final year of implementation in 2024 it is timely to reflect on the journey of our monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) system in transitioning to climate resilience.

 

A shift in focus

The Australian Government has invested in targeted WASH programs for well over a decade. The WASH sector has well-established approaches, institutions and agencies who specialise in this field. A long running investment in WASH was continued following the COVID-19 pandemic when Minister Conroy announced that Water for Women would be extended with an increased focus on climate resilience for two years in 2023 – 2024. This extension reflected the commitment to climate in the Australian Development Policy released in 2023, which also notably re-affirmed the ongoing focus on GEDSI in the Fund since 2018.

MEL is critical in the extension period as we are trying new approaches to support climate-resilient inclusive WASH. To do this well we must stop and reflect on how well things are working and adapt accordingly. If we don’t stop and reflect, we can’t act and adapt effectively. This is critical because uncertainty is inherent in a changing climate. This isn’t to say that everything in the extension period for Water for Women is unknown. While we know that WASH is a foundation for resilience, the evidence base on links between WASH, GEDSI and resilience are still emerging. MEL is one part of this important learning journey that we are undertaking with our CSO and RO partners.

 

MEL is critical in the extension period as we are trying new approaches to support climate-resilient inclusive WASH... If we don’t stop and reflect, we can’t act and adapt effectively. This is critical because uncertainty is inherent in a changing climate.

 

Adapting Fund MEL

Before the extension phase for Water for Women, preparations began in 2022 to lay the groundwork for adapting the Fund MEL system to a deeper consideration of climate resilience.  At the Fund level in early 2022, partners were brought together to reflect on what the changes meant for the sector and the Fund. As there was still uncertainty over the scope and focus of the Fund in the extension period, partners developed a set of shared principles for climate-resilient inclusive WASH. The principles built on the experience and knowledge of partners developed through the COVID-19 pandemic to provide direction for the Fund in the transition to the extension phase. At this stage in 2022, the Fund Theory of change (ToC) was also refreshed to highlight both the contribution of WASH to climate resilience, and the effort to make WASH more climate-resilient.

The principles and the refreshed ToC, in turn, provided a basis for adapting the Fund MEL system. The Fund MEL Framework was revised in late 2022 through a participatory process drawing on:

  • Technical advice integrating GEDSI, WASH and climate resilience
  • Input and experience from Fund partners via workshops covering MEL, GEDSI and climate risk assessment
  • The development of a shared understanding of key concepts particularly around climate risk assessment processes.

This process, early in the Fund extension, on agreeing on priorities has since proven to be a reliable foundation for the Fund in the extension. In these early stages of the transition to a greater focus on climate resilience we revisited the foundations of the Fund and the reasons for the investment and our intervention/s in the first place.

 

Revisiting foundations

From a MEL perspective, one of the most interesting learnings from the transition to integrating climate change was the renewed emphasis and primacy of ‘foundational activities’. In MEL jargon, ‘foundational activities’ refer to all the pre-conditions that you need to have in place before you can implement or run a program; they sit underneath the ‘strategies’ in the outcomes hierarchy diagram below. They are building blocks from which you can create a program or Theory of change (ToC) for how your program will bring about outcomes. In the Theory of Change diagram for the overall Water for Women Fund below, the foundational activities or activities for that matter aren’t even shown! But this doesn’t mean they aren’t important.  

Diagram showing Water for Women's Theory of Change

Above: Water for Women Fund's 'Theory of Change' diagram

The main way we revisited these foundations in pivoting to climate resilience was by undertaking climate risk and vulnerability assessments in the design of Fund projects. In other words, CSO and RO projects undertook assessment processes to establish the basis for why, where, and with whom they were working based on an understanding of identified climate risks. As part of their assessment the Water for Women projects undertook GEDSI analysis to understand how social vulnerabilities may be impacted and in turn reinforce associated climate risks.

This renewed focus on foundational activities in the extension is interesting for a few reasons. Water for Women had been running for five years at this point in 2022-23, notwithstanding the long history of investment in the WASH sector prior to the Water for Women Fund. Focusing on the foundational activities was a process of re-framing and re-conceptualizing existing challenges for Fund projects and reflecting on the core assumptions that underly the program.

During this transition process projects undertook a deeper type of reflection in our pivot to climate resilience, which questioned the foundations for the program. This is sometimes referred to as ‘triple-loop learning’. By contrast ‘single loop learning’ involves rapid feedback based on monitoring data and is operationally focused. Our projects do this sort of learning in activity and output reporting, which finds its way into deliverable tracking and quarterly reports. ‘Double loop learning’ deepens this reflection to be more evaluative and look across an array of data sources and consider how well projects are performing. We do this on a six-monthly and annual basis in the form of progress reporting. We also do this more evaluative type of learning in Annual ‘sense-making’ processes as well as in Mid-Term and Final evaluations where we make judgements about our progress. Triple-loop learning deepens this inquiry further to reflect on the underlying reasons for investment and intervention in the first place. At the beginning of the extension in 2023 we collaboratively developed a shared ‘Learning Agenda’ which is exploring these deeper questions about the ways in which partners understand climate risk and its relationship to WASH governance as well as the enduring role of GEDSI transformation in a changing WASH context.

 

Practice based evidence

MEL is one input for addressing these deeper questions which are bigger than our program or any one investment for that matter. What MEL brings to answering these questions is a type of ‘practice-based evidence’ that can help us understand from projects and practitioners what climate-resilient inclusive WASH looks like in practice.

 

MEL brings... a type of ‘practice-based evidence’ that can help us understand from projects and practitioners what climate-resilient inclusive WASH looks like in practice.

 

One of the key principles agreed at the beginning of the extension by our partners was continuity. There was little desire to re-invent the wheel when it came to well established WASH monitoring systems that have stood the test of time over subsequent investments and changing priorities and shifting contexts. It’s helpful to remember that our WASH monitoring systems have evolved considerably in the past decade as exemplified by the Fund in the integration of GEDSI considerations into routine WASH monitoring. Indeed, there are many lessons from integrating GEDSI into WASH monitoring that have applicability to our transition to climate resilience.

Official guidance is still being developed on monitoring resilience and adaptation through WASH. Our core WASH indicators developed by the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), which feed directly into Sustainable Development Goal Six (SDG6) do not currently explicitly address climate resilience. Global WASH stakeholders including WHO and UNICEF are currently considering ways to integrate climate resilience into WASH monitoring systems.

In the meantime, we know that the contribution of inclusive WASH to climate resilience is complex due to long-terms pathways and associated uncertainty assessing resilience, which is by nature a multi-dimensional concept. To address these challenges our WASH monitoring system has learned from GEDSI integration by taking a ‘twin-track’ approach including both (i) targeted as well as (ii) mainstreamed strategies for WASH monitoring. In other words, we have incorporated climate specific approaches as well as integrated monitoring tools as part of our broader MEL system.

 

Small steps

Another key lesson from our work in GEDSI that equally applies to climate resilience monitoring is to focus on ‘intermediate outcomes’ or stepping stones towards broader change. For instance, building on the foundational work that was undertaken at the outset of the extension, our monitoring system now has an explicit focus on understanding the strategies for assessing, integrating and responding to climate risks. This could be characterised as a form of what MEL wonks call ‘process monitoring’. Or as one of our partners put it: ‘it's not the destination but the journey’ that counts. Our GEDSI monitoring system has been a valuable resource for this shift as we have an extensive set of qualitative research and MEL resources that can be used for process monitoring. One of the tools that we use is called ‘Stories of Transformation’, a narrative technique based on Outcome Harvesting and Most Significant Change (MSC) to understand how change occurs. Critically, these sorts of tools can also be used to surface unintended consequences such as resistance and backlash to changes in gender and social norms, which are necessary for a do no harm approach. Looking ahead, these approaches are critical for resilience if we are to prevent climate maladaptation.

 

 As one of our partners put it: ‘it's not the destination but the journey’ that counts.

 

Looking back and looking forward

From an evaluation standpoint the transition to climate has turned our priorities upside down. In 2022 our Fund partners undertook evaluations of their WASH projects. These evaluations were traditional in many respects, taking a ‘summative’ approach looking back retrospectively on the outcomes, impacts and achievements from the first phase (2018 – 2022). Going into the extension period (2023 – 2024), our partner evaluations are also taking a more ‘formative’ and forward-looking approach to understanding what is working well and what can be improved. A key part of this for projects is to test and examine their assumptions made in the re-design of their projects based on climate risk assessments. Given the complexities associated with the shift to GEDSI and climate resilience in the WASH sector it will be important for final evaluations that are undertaken as part of the Fund to demonstrate contribution rather than attribution. The evaluations might for instance examine to what extent the risk assessments that were undertaken at the beginning of the extension have provided a useful basis for informing subsequent strategies and in turn supporting community resilience, which is obviously influenced by a wide range of factors that are beyond the influence of our projects.

The outcomes that are achieved by our Fund projects are often part of broader shifts that are taking place. WASH interventions are part of broader systems. This is recognised by our Fund projects which often seek to intervene in ‘entry points’ for broader change, for instance by seeking to put WASH on the agenda for institutional funding or decision-making. For instance, one of the highlights of the Fund in the past seven years has been the shift in attitudes towards menstrual health and hygiene within and beyond the WASH sector. The Fund has no doubt been a catalyst for this shift by destigmatising menstrual health and being a proactive force for positive change. Demonstrating the unique contribution of the Fund to these changes vis a vis other factors is a challenging task and one that will be supported by the commitment to learning from practice that has been cultivated by partners in the Fund.

Overall, the transition to a deeper and more targeted focus on climate change within the Fund over the past few years has prompted partners to reflect on factors unique to the Fund and the WASH sector will help us adapt into the future. The process of adapting the MEL system these past few years has highlighted the ongoing relevance of GEDSI in WASH in a changing climate. We are reminded to not forget the do no harm principle, to focus on the journey as well as the destination, and to question our assumptions as we work towards transformational change.


 

This insight was written by Stuart Raetz, Water for Women’s former Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Adviser.

To learn more about Water for Women's progress towards climate-resilient inclusive WASH for the period 2023-2024 visit:

Our Progress

 

The views expressed in this article are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Water for Women, the Australian Government or our partners.
0 Likes

Contact Us