Session Duration: 1 hour
Format: Lecture, MEL matrix design, group presentation
MEL is a critical component of any well-structured PPP. It ensures that partnerships are not just active, but effective, accountable, and adaptive. In the context of research and innovation PPPs, MEL goes beyond simply tracking outputs; it provides the evidence base for assessing whether the partnership is delivering value for all partners, achieving its goals, and generating lessons for future collaborations. Below is a detailed discussion of each of the essential elements that make up a strong MEL framework for PPPs:
a) MEL Framework for PPPs: A comprehensive MEL framework provides the overall structure for how progress will be tracked, performance assessed, and learning integrated throughout the lifecycle of the partnership. In the context of PPPs, the MEL framework must be co-created and jointly owned by all partners to reflect their diverse interests and expectations. This means agreeing on what success looks like from multiple perspectives: policy impact for government, return on investment for private partners, research outcomes for academia, and community benefits for civil society. The framework should outline clear objectives, indicators, data collection methods, responsibilities, timelines, and feedback mechanisms. Importantly, it must link back to the partnership’s initial goals and theory of change, helping partners remain focused and aligned as the project unfolds. Without a well-defined MEL framework, there is a risk that efforts will become fragmented, achievements will go unrecognized, and valuable insights will be lost.
b) Data Collection and Analysis: For a MEL framework to function effectively, the right data must be collected and analyzed systematically. This involves selecting methods that suit the nature of the project and the capacities of the partners. For PPPs in West Africa, where resources and infrastructure may be limited, it’s important to blend both qualitative and quantitative methods. Quantitative data might include metrics such as the number of technologies transferred or investment generated, while qualitative methods such as interviews, focus groups, or participatory storytelling can capture community experiences, partner dynamics, or unintended outcomes. Partners must agree on who is responsible for collecting which data, how often, and using what tools. For example, an NGO may collect community feedback, while a private partner tracks financial indicators. Tools like mobile surveys (e.g., KoboToolbox) and digital dashboards can facilitate efficient data collection, especially in multi-site projects. Data should be disaggregated where possible (by gender, location, sector, etc.) to support inclusive analysis. Ultimately, this data provides the foundation for evidence-based decision-making and course correction.
c) Feedback Loops and Learning Briefs: One of the most powerful but often neglected aspects of MEL is the creation of intentional feedback loops. Feedback loops are the mechanisms by which insights from monitoring and evaluation are fed back into decision-making processes in real time. In a PPP, this could involve monthly performance reviews, quarterly learning workshops, or partner reflection meetings. Learning briefs are concise, focused documents that synthesize key findings, successes, and challenges during a specific period. These briefs help partners take stock of what is working, what is not, and why. They can also serve as tools for sharing lessons across sectors, institutions, or even with other countries undertaking similar partnerships. Establishing these feedback practices helps make learning visible and actionable. More importantly, it builds a culture of continuous improvement where partners are not afraid to adjust strategies, innovate new approaches, or acknowledge failure as a step toward success.
d) Shared Performance Indicators: Performance indicators in PPPs must reflect both individual accountability and shared responsibility. This means that while each partner may track their own deliverables, there must also be joint indicators that measure the success of the partnership as a whole. These might include the number of innovations successfully piloted, the percentage of budget executed on time, the extent of private investment leveraged, or the policy influence of research results. Jointly developed indicators foster collective ownership and reduce the tendency for “siloed” evaluation, where each partner measures only their achievements. The development of these indicators should consider the different reporting needs of each sector involved (e.g., government funders may want socio-economic indicators, while private companies may want performance returns). Furthermore, the indicators must be SMART. Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound ,to provide useful information for both day-to-day management and long-term evaluation.
e) Adaptive Management and Real-Time Decision-Making: The dynamic nature of PPPs, often involving diverse actors, multiple geographies, and complex goals, requires that partners be able to adapt their approaches as conditions change. MEL enables adaptive management by providing real-time data and analysis that can trigger timely decisions. For instance, if data shows that community uptake of an innovation is lower than expected, the partnership may decide to adjust its outreach strategy or involve additional civil society groups. Similarly, if budget execution is behind schedule, financial reporting tools can help identify bottlenecks and reallocate resources. Adaptive management also means being willing to revisit and revise initial assumptions. MEL provides the evidence base to justify changes and facilitates open discussions among partners, making the partnership more resilient and responsive to evolving realities.
f) Knowledge Sharing and Communication of Results: Effective MEL in PPPs should result in the production and dissemination of knowledge products that showcase achievements and inform broader audiences. These include technical reports, policy briefs, case studies, infographics, and presentations. The knowledge generated through PPPs, especially in research and innovation contexts, has value far beyond the immediate project team. Partners should agree on how findings will be communicated, who the target audiences are, and which platforms will be used. This could involve presenting at national science and technology forums, publishing in open-access journals, or engaging local media to highlight community impact. Communication of results not only ensures transparency and accountability but also strengthens the visibility of the partnership and helps to attract future collaborators and funders.
MEL for PPPs:
In a Public-Private Partnership, aligning Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) with shared objectives is essential for tracking progress and demonstrating impact. KPIs ensure that all partners remain focused on common goals, such as innovations commercialized or communities reached. A strong KPI framework should include both quantitative and qualitative indicators to capture outcomes and experiences. It must also distinguish between individual partner contributions and joint achievements. This approach enhances accountability, transparency, and continuous learning across the partnership.
Sample MEL Framework
| Objective | Indicator | Source | Frequency | Responsible |
| Expand Agritech reach | % increase in rural adoption | Field survey | Quarterly | PPP M&E Unit |
✍️ MEL Matrix Group Task: Each group is to design a basic MEL Matrix for one PPP idea developed earlier. Focus on shared KPIs, data sources, and who is accountable.
Integrated Group Activities (Across Units)
1. PPP Concept Design Exercise: Each team is to design a full PPP proposal on a real-world issue (e.g., renewable energy for rural schools). Must include stakeholder map, roles, governance, resource plan, and MEL framework.
2. Crisis Management Challenge: Crisis cards simulate real issues (e.g., corruption scandal, funding delay). Teams respond using previously learned PPP tools.
3. PPP Lifecycle Strategy Map: Groups is to map out activities, roles, and challenges for each phase (initiation → implementation → closure) using color-coded timelines.
Once partnerships are in place, their value is maximized when they contribute to bringing research outputs into real-world applications. Strategic partnerships, particularly those involving industry actors, can open direct channels to markets, enabling smoother technology transfer and commercialization. Module 3 builds on the collaborative frameworks explored in Module 2 by focusing on how research outputs can be transformed into marketable products, services, or processes. The trust, governance structures, and mutual understanding developed through PPPs become critical assets in negotiating licenses, sharing intellectual property, and co-developing innovations for scale.
Facilitation Notes
a) Guide groups to co-create shared KPIs.
b) Stress balancing financial, social, and innovation metrics.
c) Encourage reflection on trust and transparency in joint MEL.
Suggestions for Further Reading
a) UNDP (2016). Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for Development Results.
b) Bamberger, M., Vaessen, J., & Raimondo, E. (2015). Dealing with Complexity in Development Evaluation.