00:32:03 Moustapha Sall: HI Greetings from Senegal 00:32:04 Suzy Vincent: Afternoon - Suzy V from London 00:32:09 Sergio Fernandez: Hi, Bolivia in the house too 00:32:18 Benson Thuku: Hello from Kenya 00:33:03 Joseph Mkanthama: Hello from Malawi- Christian Aid 00:33:14 Alfred Kuma: Hello from Ghana 00:33:47 Adrian DeDomenico: Hello all from Oxfam America (USA) 00:34:19 Alix Tiernan: Hello from Chrstian Aid in Ireland :) 00:36:12 Selam Seje: Selam Seje, Netherlands Red Cross 00:37:25 Sarah Reidy: Good morning from Washington DC - Sarah Reidy, PAI 00:38:17 Daniel Vincent Nyamai: Good evening from Nairobi, Kenya. 00:38:28 Daniel Vincent Nyamai: -Daniel Nyamai 00:39:29 Sandrine Emambu: Great to be here from CRS. Hi Heather :) 00:40:07 Vera Lacey: Hi everyone from CAFOD (London), VΔ›ra 00:40:33 Kelly Jones: Hi everyone, Kelly Jones here from Pro Mujer! Kelly.jones@promujer.org 00:41:03 Seth Otto, NetHope (he/him): Welcome! 😊 00:41:12 T N: Hi everyone, Teresa from International Rescue Committee (UK) 00:41:44 Alvaro Cobo: Greetings everyone, Alvaro from Catholic Relief Services. 00:41:55 Daniel Vincent Nyamai: Daniel Nyamai 00:42:12 Daniel Vincent Nyamai: Sos Children's Villages 00:42:29 temesgen Bocher: Hi everyone, Temesgen Bocher, World Vision Canada. 00:43:21 Ofhani Mashau: Hi everyone. Timothy Mashau munsoft FMS south Africa 00:44:25 julien colomer: I am with CGIAR - we have around 2800 grants and (we think) around 20k indicators 00:44:54 julien colomer: Indicator options sounds useful... 00:45:37 Darcy Strouse: Hi everyone, Darcy Strouse from ChildFund International, Research and Learning Team (USA) 00:45:55 Jane Nakanwagi: Hi everyone; I am Jane from Trocaire - MEAL Advisor 00:46:05 John Chiokwe: John Chiokwe PMER Systems WaterAid UK 00:46:23 Rachel Kimber: Is standardizing only top down? 00:46:29 Alix Tiernan: Can we ask questions here? 00:46:46 Andy Simpson: Andy Simpson with Tearfund. We have tried standard and custom indicators and found across our projects only about 25% uptake of our standard indicators 00:46:51 Beatriz Lucas [NetHope], she/her: Yes please do post your questions in the chat. 00:47:04 Maria Mor: Hi everyone Maria Mor from Pro Mujer 00:47:58 Alix Tiernan: I have a question about AmpImpact - it it worthwhile to use only the M&E Function (like where Plan is at) even if the organization is not using Salesforce for any of its other PM Systems 00:48:21 Suzy Vincent: What approaches did you take to drive use of global indicators? Did you drive this through automation or culture change (or both?)? 00:50:25 Andy Simpson: Question: Do you let Project staff contextualise standardise indicators ? 00:50:53 Caitlin Whittemore: Caitlin Whittemore from World Vision - how has everyone managed the need to also do direct data entry with donor systems (such as USAID AAMP/ 00:51:10 Larry Johnson: I'm have the same question as Alix. If organizations have platforms other than Salesforce such as Microsoft, how have people handled dealing with two or more different platforms. 00:51:38 Julie Rajaratnam: Visibility of the data and information is a key benefit. We pull data from Amp Impact and our financial system into a set of Tableau dashboards which allows all staff access to explore and use the data. 00:51:54 Joseph Mkanthama: For Plan International, you have mentioned about partners using the system for reporting, I need to learn more on this. How have you managed to do it? Any challenges you have faced and how did you work around it? And in terms of reporting rate, anything on this?- On average, how many partners do actually report during a specific reporting period? 00:52:28 Caitlin Whittemore: Caitlin Whittemore - World Vision US. How has everyone managed the need for direct data entry to donor systems (such as AAMP/ART and DIS)? Do you find there is duplication? Transformation of data needed to fit donor formats? 00:53:51 Alix Tiernan: I have the same question as Caitlin - is AmpImpact creating a separate and additional data management system to that in each of the projects towards the donor? 00:55:23 Tewolde Mekonnen: Hi, Tewolde from World Vision. I want to ask the following: 1) is there any requirement/guidance in place for using standard indicators during project proposal development? 2) how do you manage donors requirement on indicators - as some donors may insist using non-standard indicators? 3) What procedures (if any) does the system use to aggregate data from indicators measuring the same thing but with different descriptions 4) I heard outcome level aggregation. What is the criteria for aggregation. Or what do you do to make sure outcome level are aggregated. 00:57:16 Melton Llenos: Im keen to hear about challenges encountered by local partner organizations when using tech or digitization? How does this impact the implementing partner organizations on the ground in terms of capacity, sustainability after the project ends? 00:58:11 Adrian DeDomenico: Hi, Adrian from Oxfam America (USA). My question is even further down the data value chain: Is there any evidence of two or more INGOs / NGOs sharing aggregated or anonymized impact data across overlapping regions to improve strategic coordination and program services? 00:58:34 Melton Llenos: Or maybe a step back related to my question above, what is the role of partner organization in this initiative? 00:59:14 Enrico Bonaiuti: Hi Enrico, CGIAR - Italy. Were you able to demonstrate use of data for decision making (I.e. showing a value to those entering those in the right quality) and at the same time realize you were collecting information that in the end where not useful? 00:59:59 Ashley McInnes: Hi Caitlin and Alix, we (Operation Eyesight Universal) label bespoke indicators from donors/funders as such (e.g. USAID - indicator X). Then we use reports in Amp Impact to combine them with equivalent standardized (global) indicators from our projects that follow our internal standardized MEL plans. So we still need to manually complete the USAID reporting and also into amp impact. 01:02:22 Enrico Bonaiuti: Julie in this effort to keep it simple, have you focused more data collection on indicators related to process, output, outcome or impact? 01:03:24 Julie Rajaratnam: Hi Enrico, we've focused on impact indicators, and also collecting key results/milestones (which can be more output oriented). 01:05:15 Enrico Bonaiuti: This is very clear, Julie. Thanks. If time allow how was the process to validate results reported? Was something based on evidence check (online?) done with internal staff or employing external reviewers? 01:08:27 Enrico Bonaiuti: Heather, this is very interesting model to ensure data ownership and commitment from different areas. Probably increase also data quality 01:10:38 Jocelyn Powelson: Can you tell us more about the start-up investment in terms of how much time and effort went into creating these systems and getting them launched? 01:10:39 Julie Rajaratnam: We've established project directors as accountable for the project data entered into the system, so once the MEL staff completes the project entry, the project director reviews and approves the record. As we build out the menu of standardized indicators, this is something we're thinking about - how to collect the underlying documentation, assumptions, evidence that supports the data that is reported. Since projects are so varied in how they measure, and often are using other platforms for their project measurement, this may be as simple as a link to that project documentation. 01:12:08 Julie Rajaratnam: ^ That response is directed to Enrico's follow up question. 01:12:36 Heather Dolphin: To Andy's question about contextualizing indicators, we have a few indicators that count the number of cases that have increased partner capacity which asks teams to submit the cases themselves that reveals all the context that helps indicator owners assess whether their cases can be counted as meeting the requirements of that indicator. That's an example of how we incorporate context 01:12:36 Alvaro Cobo: At CRS we prepositioned operational reports for the field level where regions, countries and projects are able to follow up their indicator selection and reporting status. We think this was a contributing factor to increase adoption. Reviewers had also prepositioned reports to facilitate review and approval. 01:14:10 David Abreu: CGIAR - David Abreu, Italy - Thank you so much for hosting this useful webinar. Is there a demo of the system available? 01:15:44 T N: Is there any example of using Amp Impact Management of Indicators and Results Frameworks integrated with Grant Management/full grant cycle management? How is the experience so far? 01:17:16 Kimberly Egan: Do any of your organizations use Amp Impact for sub granting to partners and collecting data back from them directly? 01:18:35 Heather Dolphin: In response to Melton's question about partner engagement, we ask partners to contribute their results although CRS program managers are tasked with leading that process to identify the partner contributions to be included in final results 01:20:08 Enrico Bonaiuti: Will you share contact emails after the webinar to participants to arrange follow up on specific aspects? 01:20:37 Heather Dolphin: no problem on CRS' side 01:22:44 Beatriz Lucas [NetHope], she/her: Thanks Enrico, we can include contacts in our follow-up email with links will be sent your way later today! The recording and resources will be shared on the NetHope Network. 01:25:25 Heather Dolphin: In response to Tewolde's question on standardization of indicators, whenever available, CRS selected donor-accepted standardized indicators. Ea indicator has a detailed indicator reference sheet which all who report on that indicator must abide by in order to be counted. Where there are deviations that cannot be aggregated, they are not counted. However, one criteria for the selection of indicators is that where possible, to choose indicators that can be harmonized across projects. A looser requirement of the indicator in some cases is used to enable more projects to report on it 01:25:32 Beatriz Lucas [NetHope], she/her: Links will also be available on our website http://nethope.org/ 01:27:16 Zak Kaufman - Vera Solutions: Re: email, zak@verasolutions.org is mine πŸ™‚ 01:27:36 Heather Dolphin: heather.dolphin@crs.org 01:27:40 Enrico Bonaiuti: Thanks to all speakers. Very good intro with useful reflection on real cases. Surely to follow up 01:28:00 David Abreu: Indeed! Thank you! 01:28:27 Tewolde Mekonnen: Thank you Heather. 01:28:28 Andy Simpson: Thank you for the webinar & discussion 01:28:43 Stephen Franz: Thanks all. Great discussion! 01:28:45 Anders Duedahl: thanks :-) 01:28:48 Kimberly Egan: Thank you for your time and insights! 01:29:00 Lauren Montgomery-Rinehart: thank you! 01:29:00 T N: Thanks, this was super informative. 01:29:03 Vicky Scott: vicky.scott@tearfund.org (Tearfund) We are currently working on a grant management implementation within Amp, and have our MEL in another system 01:29:07 Julie Rajaratnam: Yes, happy to connect jrajaratnam@path.org 01:29:08 Bridget Rutherford: Thank you for sharing your experience! 01:29:31 Tewolde Mekonnen: Thank you all for sharing your experience! 01:29:33 Robert Ondrusek: Thanks to all for sharing their experiences and insights. Much that resonates and very worthwhile. 01:29:41 Sergio Fernandez: thank you for sharing!!! 01:29:59 John Chiokwe: Thanks for your presentation 01:30:06 Beatriz Lucas [NetHope], she/her: Thank you everyone! We appreciate you being here and for your participation. Your feedback on today's webinar is greatly appreciated. Here's the link to the webinar satisfaction survey: https://nethope.wufoo.com/forms/?formname=wizgwcw0wunall&field5=Microsoft%E2%80%99s+Management+of+Indicators+and+Results+Frameworks+Lessons+Learned Thanks again for joining us today and we will see you next time. 01:30:08 Takunda Muchemwa: Thank you for sharing 01:30:37 Moustapha Sall: Thank u