Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa
Presentation
About the Event
In 2020, an interdisciplinary consortium of partners including CLEAR-AA, the Wits School of Governance, Studies in Poverty and Inequality Institute (SPII), Social Surveys Africa (SSA), and the Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO) etc.; conducted the Covid-19 Response Impact on Social Protection Survey (CRISPS). This study was a response to the expanded social grant spending which took place in South Africa during 2020 in response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the effects of the lockdown measures. In particular, the South African President announced the provision of a special Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant of R350 to individuals over the age of 18, who were either unemployed as a result of the economic impact of the pandemic, or who had been unemployed prior to the pandemic and were not receiving any other form of social grant or the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) payment. This grant was intended to assist for a period of 6 months, however was recurrently extended for the next two years of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The CRISPS study was intended to build a robust body of evidence around how the expanded (i.e. increased amounts during the lockdown) social grants were used by the South African population, and what their use meant to individuals, households and communities. The primary objective of the evaluation was to understand the impact of the SRD grant for individuals, households and communities. The knowledge gained from the evaluation was packaged in the form of a policy brief, which was used to advocate for the extension of the SRD grant under lockdown, and the promotion of the Basic Income Grant (BIG).
This presentation will discuss the use of a longitudinal panel survey methodology; in particular, the use of the WhatsApp application to administer the survey to recipients of the SRD grant across five different South African provinces and areas plagued with severe poverty and unemployment. The WhatsApp application was seen as a measure to comply with covid-19 restrictions. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of using this instant messaging application to run a thirteen-week panel survey will be shared. Most importantly, lessons will be shared based on the experience of conducting an evaluation on a social protection programme in South Africa. Key lessons will include the responsibilities of evaluators when evaluation takes on a social justice paradigm, and the shift from the values of evaluators to the values of the participants in making judgements about the evaluand.
The CRISPS study was intended to build a robust body of evidence around how the expanded (i.e. increased amounts during the lockdown) social grants were used by the South African population, and what their use meant to individuals, households and communities. The primary objective of the evaluation was to understand the impact of the SRD grant for individuals, households and communities. The knowledge gained from the evaluation was packaged in the form of a policy brief, which was used to advocate for the extension of the SRD grant under lockdown, and the promotion of the Basic Income Grant (BIG).
This presentation will discuss the use of a longitudinal panel survey methodology; in particular, the use of the WhatsApp application to administer the survey to recipients of the SRD grant across five different South African provinces and areas plagued with severe poverty and unemployment. The WhatsApp application was seen as a measure to comply with covid-19 restrictions. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of using this instant messaging application to run a thirteen-week panel survey will be shared. Most importantly, lessons will be shared based on the experience of conducting an evaluation on a social protection programme in South Africa. Key lessons will include the responsibilities of evaluators when evaluation takes on a social justice paradigm, and the shift from the values of evaluators to the values of the participants in making judgements about the evaluand.
Speakers
| Name | Title | Biography |
|---|---|---|
| Dr. Steven Masvaure | Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa | Steven Masvaure is a Senior Monitoring and Evaluation Technical Specialist at the University of Witwatersrand’s Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results. He holds a PhD in Development Studies and possesses more than 10 years of working experience in the development sector. |
| Mr Jabulani Mathebula | Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa | Mr. Jabulani has 10 years of research experience in South Africa. He acquired his experience in the field of agriculture and social sciences research. He worked with a multi-disciplinary team in conducting socio-economic impact research studies at the Human Sciences Research Council and SADC Researc |
| Ms. Sonny Motlanthe | Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa | Sonny Motlanthe is an Emerging Evaluator at the Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results, Anglophone Africa (CLEAR-AA), based at Witwatersrand University (Johannesburg). |
| Samukelisiwe Mkhize | Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa | Samukelisiwe Nicole Mkhize is an aspiring monitoring and evaluation practitioner with an interest in programme design and evaluation. Prior to joining the CLEAR-AA team as an Emerging Evaluator, she gained experience working in a non-governmental organization, and higher education and government. |
| Ms. Tebogo Fish | Reflecting on key issues to consider when evaluating Covid-19 Social Protection programmes in South Africa | Ms. Tebogo Fish is a Researcher working at CLEAR-AA. She has a master's degree in research psychology. She has been working in the M&E field for the last six years. Her research interests include monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and development issues in Africa. |