Monitoring and evaluation are related but distinct evidence functions. Monitoring generally tracks implementation and performance over time, while evaluation addresses deeper questions about an intervention, programme or policy.
What monitoring does
Monitoring can track inputs, activities, outputs and selected outcomes using defined indicators. It helps teams understand whether implementation is occurring as expected and whether important measures require attention.
What evaluation does
Evaluation can investigate relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability or other criteria appropriate to the context. Its design depends on the question and available evidence.
Why programme logic matters
Results chains and theories of change clarify how activities are expected to contribute to results. They help teams decide what should be monitored and which assumptions require deeper investigation.
Where research fits
Research and evaluation can overlap in methods, but their purposes may differ. Research may seek more generalisable knowledge, while evaluation is normally anchored to a particular intervention or evaluative question.
How the functions work together
Monitoring can reveal patterns and implementation problems that generate evaluation questions. Evaluation can explain or test issues that routine indicators alone cannot resolve.
Learning closes the loop
Evidence has limited value if findings are not reviewed and used. MERL makes learning explicit through routines for discussing evidence, documenting decisions and adapting implementation.
Build MERL foundations
Study the structured Monitoring, Evaluation, Research & Learning pathway at DatalytIQs Academy.