Hi Laura. That finding also jumped out to me. I suspect orgs are less willing to improve MEL than suggested by that quote. “77% [of orgs] say funders rarely or never fund MEL (excl. n/a results)”, but I assume this refer to funding restricted to MEL, whereas what I think matters to assess orgs’ preferences is whether there are funds which can be used to improve MEL. I would be surprised if funders restricted funding to non-MEL activities. So I believe orgs could spend more on MEL if they wanted to.
“75% of organizations say improving MEL is important or urgent”, but I find it difficult to interpret this without knowing what orgs would say about other activities. Maybe the vast majority of orgs considers more important or urgent improving other activities, which could explain why “only 18% would definitely pay for it”.
Hi Laura. That finding also jumped out to me. I suspect orgs are less willing to improve MEL than suggested by that quote. “77% [of orgs] say funders rarely or never fund MEL (excl. n/a results)”, but I assume this refer to funding restricted to MEL, whereas what I think matters to assess orgs’ preferences is whether there are funds which can be used to improve MEL. I would be surprised if funders restricted funding to non-MEL activities. So I believe orgs could spend more on MEL if they wanted to.
“75% of organizations say improving MEL is important or urgent”, but I find it difficult to interpret this without knowing what orgs would say about other activities. Maybe the vast majority of orgs considers more important or urgent improving other activities, which could explain why “only 18% would definitely pay for it”.