Make Poverty History Campaign Evaluation
Andy Martin, Firetail Limited
Bonn, March 2007
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Campaign
The Evaluation
Objectives and Scope
Structure
Process
Limitations
Benefits
Outputs
Final Thoughts
MakePovertyHistory
The 2005 Campaign
“Everyone
knew that 2005
was a massive
year for
development
campaigning in
the UK”
• UK Presidencies of EU & G8 (WTO,
UN)
• Campaign: Aid, Debt, Trade Justice
• 540 member coalition
– NGOs, Trades Union, Students Union,
Faith groups, UK Voluntary
organisations, development education
organisations & others
– NGO-led
• Year long programme of action
– White Band Days, Edinburgh Rally
(G8), TV, New media, Trade Justice
Lobby, WTO (Live8?)
• Massive public awareness and
participation
• Bigger than anyone anticipated
The Evaluation: Objectives and scope
Evaluation questions
• What progress did the
coalition make against
its objectives during
2005?
• What were the strengths
and weaknesses of the
coalition’s approach and
set up?
• What lessons can be
learned for the future?
The coalition’s objectives
• Achieve policy change in
the areas of more and
better aid, debt relief and
trade justice
• Create an unstoppable
momentum for change in
2005
• Leave the public
committed to further
change beyond 2005
How we did it
• Governance
– Commissioned by Co-ordination Team/BOND
– Independent, external
– Reporting to Co-ordination Team
• Interview - based
– Participative & Anonymous
– Over 70 in depth interviews
• Three stream interview programme
– Internal, External, Local Campaigners
• Review of internal documentation
– Key minutes, policy notes, briefing documents
• Referencing existing quantitative research
– Long term attitudes work
• Alongside other MPH evaluations
– Media (Metrica), New Media (Fairsay)
Structure of evaluation
1.
Progress against objectives
Background
• Background
• History
• Key moments
2.
Approach & Setup
3.
Lessons learned
Lessons
Learned
External
Perceptions
Local
Campaigners
Ways of
working
• Impact on public,
politics and
policy
• Reasons for
impact
• Other
observations
• Achievements
• Policy change
• Coalition working
• Concerns
• Impact on
• Unity,
mobilisation,
decisionmaking,
resolving
tensions
• Review of
structures
• Leadership
• Managing
relationships
with others/
Govt/ Public
• Messages
Next Steps
• Consolidate/
Sustain in UK
• Trade
• Global
mobilisation
Limitations
• Stated in the evaluation
“Our approach has
been deliberately
participative.
Rather than seek to
offer a definite view,
we have attempted
to present the
consensus of
internal and
external opinion.”
– Achieving a representative sample of
opinion
– International impact
– Review of all communications activity
– Detailed long term impact on public
awareness
• On further reflection…
– Not embedded in process
– Lack of reference points & metrics
– Lack of consensus about what the
evaluation was for
– Necessarily short term
Benefits
• A focus on content not process
– The right approach for a large, fast moving and often informal
campaign
– A neutral, external, target focused view
– Getting the balance right between breadth and focus
– Quick turnaround
– New news
• An attempt to be relevant
– Biased towards action, lesson learning and next steps
– A clear view of our audience (not public or govt)
• Providing a framework for some of the strategic questions faced
by the coalition
–
–
–
–
–
What was going to happen after MPH
Campaigning challenges
Effectiveness of activism
…but not saying anything people didn’t know
…did we change anything?
Outputs of the evaluation
“Most lessons to
take from the
year are
definitely
positive. The
question is
how to maintain
this now you’re
in a different
era”
•
Public mobilisation
– Mass awareness and mass participation
– Parliamentary mobilisation
•
Policy change
–
•
Achievements on aid and debt. Little on trade.
Ways of working
– Highly decentralised and consensual
– Good at: Promoting coalition unity, mobilising
supporters, harnessing the energy of supporters
– Not so good at: Resolving tension, taking strategic
decisions. Heavy demands on people
•
Four areas of challenge
–
–
–
–
Leadership model
Co-ordinating responses
Public momentum
British campaign
Final thoughts
• Content not process
– Evaluation was not built into the campaign from the start
– This may have been impossible & not advantageous
• Scope
– There’s never enough time or money
– Time spent working on scope was vital
• Feeding back
– The campaign was ‘received’ rather than signed off
– The coalition then disbanded
– Who took responsibility for what happened next?
• Next steps
– Were we right to put these in?
– At least it wasn’t left on the shelf
• Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
– Who evaluates the evaluation?
Judge for yourself
• BOND website
– http://www.bond.org.uk/campaign/mph.htm
• Campaign Evaluation
• Media Evaluation
• New Media Evaluation
• Verdict statements
• Policy demands