Шрифт:
Интервал:
Закладка:
In addition, based on the analysis of the completed questionnaires, the positive and negative results obtained were determined, as well as the relationship between the project activities and results. It is worth noting that this analysis divided the results into expected (planned) and unplanned ones. In case of the girls, for example, the project produced three types of results. First, they became more confident and convinced about the possibility of gender equality. According to the researchers’ analysis, the following chain of changes led to the first result: through soccer training, girls realized that soccer was not just a game for boys, as they had previously thought; besides, soccer training allowed them to appreciate the positive effects of sports, which gave them self-confidence and created awareness of gender equality opportunities. Second, the girls developed imagination and creativity. Third, it was easier for girls to communicate with friends and parents. The authors consider the latter an unplanned outcome of the report, as it was not part of the project goals.
The project results for parents included increased awareness of gender discrimination and improved mutual understanding, as the parents started to communicate more with their daughters. Volunteer coaches have developed communication skills, gained coaching experience, and noted successes in personal growth through participation in the project.
Actifit, which prepared and implemented the project, was able to engage donors, partners and volunteers. Therefore, one of the positive results of the project for the company was saving its own financial resources and employee labor. Additionally, the company was able to make the project more sustainable. Finally, successful operation of the Soccer Academy in Eskisehir was a case study that Actifit can use to further promote its “Girls on the Soccer Field” program. Employee motivation associated with participation in this program has also increased. The negative result of the program was that three employees of the company spent 28 days of their time working on the project.
The next step was monetizing the contributions made by the stakeholders and the results obtained. Only financial and in-kind contribution by Actifit and the donors was taken into account during the monetary evaluation. The report authors decided not to include a monetary evaluation of the time spent on participation in the project by children, parents, and volunteer coaches.
In monetizing the results, the authors used data on the cost of paid services, which would enable the project participants to obtain similar results otherwise. For example, there is a paid soccer section in Eskisehir. The assumption was made that a week of paid soccer lessons would give the girls the same result in terms of developing selfconfidence and understanding the possibility of gender equality, so the cost of this week was used as a “proxy” in estimating the cost of the outcome.
Outside of the project, parents could learn to understand their daughters better and communicate with them more if they took a class with a family psychologist, so the cost of such a course was a monetary estimate for this outcome.
Successful operation of the Soccer Academy in Eskisehir was a case study that Actifit can use to further promote its “Girls on the Soccer Field” program.
Since no one lectures on gender inequality in Eskisehir on a fee basis, it is curious that raising parents’ awareness of gender discrimination has received zero monetary value.
The project SROI was then calculated based on the monetary estimates obtained, both for the project as a whole and for each individual group of stakeholders. The overall SROI for the project was 12.45 – that is, for every Turkish Lira (TL) invested in the project, 12.45 TL worth of social effect was produced. Of these 12.45 TL, the girls’ results accounted for 20 % (2.43 TL) and the parents’ results accounted for 38 % (4.68 TL).
PROJECT EVALUATION
There are several different but similar approaches to evaluating projects. We prefer the one specifically described by the term ‘evaluation’.
This approach features a set of analytical activities that are conducted to provide project's decision-makers with the information they need regarding the project. The decision-makers in this case are usually either project managers or donors.
This approach assumes that a monitoring and evaluation system is developed as early as at the project planning phase. The system is based on the results of stakeholder analysis and a description of the project mechanism, which explains how the implementation of project activities will lead to the achievement of expected results (this description is commonly referred to as the theory of change or logical framework of the project).
Accordingly, using this approach, a stakeholder analysis of the “Girls on the Soccer Field” project would have had to be conducted as early as the planning stage. After that, it would be necessary to build a change map or a logical framework that would explain how the project activities would eventually translate to the progress towards its goals. Building such a map could also help to specify the goals (final expected results) of the project. For example, one of the goals is formulated as follows: “Through soccer, raise awareness of gender equality and promote greater participation of girls in sports.” In developing a change map, one would need to decide what chain of changes connects a presentation on gender equality for girls’ parents to this goal: for example, more informed parents would support their daughters’ desire to play sports. At this point, one may deem it reasonable that the results of the presentation would be better placed in a separate chain of changes and isolated as a separate project goal.
Based on the map of expected changes, the project authors determine what information will be needed to track the progress of project implementation and achievement of its goals. The next step is to decide who, when and how will collect, analyze and