Consultative Impact Monitoring of Policy - CoIMPact - Advantages and Limitations

files/images_static/pros.jpg
  • It fills existing gaps in poverty information at the national level.
  • It emphasises the feedback, discussion and actual use of the information generated.
  • It relies on and incorporates information from other monitoring efforts, including statistical exercises.
  • It has a firmly established institutional base in existing national agencies, involving stakeholders and decision-makers at various levels throughout the process.
  • It stresses capacity building and knowledge transfer to organisations at national and decentralised levels to allow them carry out future rounds of the exercise.
  • CoIMPact can be of use in both the formulation and subsequent adaptation and amendment of policy initiatives, and is implemented with the intention that its findings will influence policy.
  • The results of using the method highlights how policies impact on different groups in different ways.
files/images_static/cons.jpg
  • The communities participating in a CoIMPact exercise expect direct “benefits” from their participation (i.e. tangible benefits), namely government projects that address their needs and requirements.
  • Extensive capacity building is required in order to ensure that CoIMpact is successfully used.
  • Active participation of all communities is difficult to organise and CoIMPact requires feedback sessions to be conducted with communities.
  • CoIMPact is relatively expensive compared to PPA-1 exercises, but far cheaper when compared to undertaking a household survey.

Comments:

Something missing, unclear, misleading or a typo? Help us to make this page better!
Upon approval, the MethodFinder team will publish your comment here (* mandatory fields):

Comment