Meeting agenda
Donor-practitioner-academic learning and information-sharing meeting, 15 March 2021
Last updated
Was this helpful?
Donor-practitioner-academic learning and information-sharing meeting, 15 March 2021
Last updated
Was this helpful?
The meeting was co-organised by the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD), , and Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA).
WHEN: 15 March 2021, 15:00-17:00 CET / 09:00-11:00 ET
WHERE: Online
Zoom meeting registration link:
Summary and overview of IMPACT and donor-practitioner learning
SDC and coordinated support for joint learning mechanisms
Why are donor practitioner convenings and coordination mechanisms necessary?
15:15-15:30
Case study 1: The use of theories of change in media and governance programmes
15:30-15:45
Case study 2: PRIMED- Protecting Independent Media for Effective Development
15:45-16:00
Case study 3: Measuring the impact of investigative reporting
For more background visit:
For more background visit:
For more background visit:
16:00-16:30
Breakout group 1: The use of theories of change in media and governance programmes
Co-chairs:
Rapporteur:
16:00-16:30
Breakout group 2: PRIMED - Protecting Independent Media for Effective Development
Co-chairs:
Rapporteur:
Dennis Reineck, DW Akademie
16:00-16:30
Breakout group 3: Measuring the impact of investigative reporting
Co-chairs:
Rapporteur:
What have international media assistance organisations and donors learnt from using "theories of change" and "result chains" to enhance the projects design, monitoring and evaluation?
When are theories of change appropriate?
When should donors look to use other frameworks?
How can media support groups create "theories of change" when there is a lack of evidence?
In what circumstances should theories of change be built on assumptions?
How can we create more evidence-based exercises using "theories of change" and "result chains" as a collaboration between academia and practitioners?
What are the biggest challenges in the application of these models in practice?
Should theories of change applied to media assistance be standardised? If so, what is the right process?
For a summary of the case study and highlights from the breakout group discussion see:
Where are the gaps and how could they be filled?
How can PRIMED contribute to learning across the whole sector (e.g. those outside the PRIMED consortium such as other media development actors and donors as well as, researchers and academics)?
What research and data needs to be produced from an evidence and learning perspective?
What formats should it be in and how should it be shared?
For a summary of the case study and highlights from the breakout group discussion see:
How can we more effectively measure the impact of investigative journalism - on audiences and on society (especially closed societies) - at a programmatic level as well as at the macro level?
What role can academia and collaborative partnerships play in helping investigative journalism (and those that support it) understand the societal impact of their work?
How can we fill the gaps in research specifically about the impact of investigative journalism (rather than other kinds of journalism)?
For a summary of the case study and highlights from the breakout group discussion see:
16:30-16:55
Reporting from the breakout groups
Rapporteurs present the key takeaways from the breakout groups
16:55-17:00
Conclusion and next steps
Mira Milosevic,
Melina Papageorgiou,
Mark Nelson, )
Melina Papageorgiou, (SDC)
Christoph Spurk, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, School of Applied Linguistics,
Caroline Vuillemin,
James Deane,
Abir Awad,
Justin Williams, UK
Drew Sullivan,
Shannon Maguire,
David Lush,
Nick Benequista,
Peter Whitehead,
Maha Taki,
Sharon Moshavi,
Rana Sabagh,
Gabriela Manuli,
What research and data are being produced that could provide evidence to support answering ?
Mira Milosevic,
