Stakeholder Engagement and Evidence Uptake Plan (SEEP)

Stakeholder engagement and evidence uptake plan (SEEP)

About 3ie

3ie’s mandate is to improve the evidence base for what works, how, why and at what cost in international development policies and programmes in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs). To further that mission, 3ie funds high-quality impact evaluations and systematic reviews that are policyrelevant and useful to decision makers.

What is a stakeholder engagement and evidence uptake plan (SEEP)?

3ie recognises that evidence alone does not have much impact. This evidence suggests that, among other things, uptake and use is highly dependent on factors related to communication and engagement. Early and ongoing engagement with a range of key actors can therefore be very effective. Dedicated to funding policy-relevant research that decision makers can access and understand, 3ie requires researchers to develop astakeholder engagement and evidence uptake planto benefit from what we know about evidence uptake and use.

This plan will help you think through strategies to encourage study ownership by key stakeholders from the very beginning, strengthen the demand for information about studyprogress and results and help increase the likelihood that findings will be known, understood and used to improve policy and programming.

Ensuring that the plan is appropriate to your role as the evaluation team

3ie expressly cautions against the promotion of findings from single studies without seating findings in the broader evidence base. Researchers have a necessary and vital role to play as communicators of evidence so that policymakers and implementers understand and use your information in appropriate ways. This plan takes into account where timely and appropriate communication and engagement by researchers makes the most contribution. We also know that there are limits to what researchers can do in promoting evidence use from a given study.

Realistic expectations

How long it takes to change policies or programmes or how difficult it is usually depends on what is being changed. It always depends on more than just evidence. Those caveats aside, we do regularly see instances where early work in the study, such as baseline findings, can lead to immediate changes, usually at programme level. But we accept that major policy and programming change usually takes much longer than the lifespan of a single study and that often the study is a contributing factor, not the sole factor. However, evidence is much more likely to contribute to change, large, small, incremental or wholesale, sooner or later,if the team lays down a solid foundation of effective communication and engagement approaches.

The plan and its implementation are 3ie grant requirements

We strongly recommend that you develop your plan in the team and, as appropriate,in collaboration with the implementing agency.We encourage you to reach out to 3ie for any inputs or constructive feedback as you develop your plan.

A completedSEEP must be approved by 3ie before the second tranche for an evaluation is disbursed. For each reporting cycle, grantees will be required to report on their policy and programming engagement and uptake activities (as per the guidelines in Appendix 3: Stakeholder engagement and evidence uptake plan (SEEP) progress report of this document).

The planis a living document and an active strategy. Policy and programme implementation contexts are dynamic. Opportunities for engagement emerge or change regularly and this should be reflected in evolving approaches to engagement over the life of the project.

CONTEXT ANALYSIS

The political economy context for evidence production is an important determinant in whether or not the evidence is likely to be taken up and used (see guidance box for relevant resources). Usually, the main driver is the political context, which includes the political system- actors and institutions- and the power dynamics both among and within theinstitutions and actors. For example,whether it is a relatively open and democratic or a closed and autocratic society, or if it is a fragile andconflict-affected society where political institutions are weak or non-functioning. This is likely to impact how knowledge circulates and how decisions are taken. It would be important to consider what knowledge, debate and decision-making is public and how much is not public. Do communities have access to and any influence over formal power, and if so, how?As part of this analysis, it would also be important to examine the context for decision-making and social and political structures, including actors within communities, and how those determinants are likely to influence ownership, involvement and uptake and use of study findings in decision-making.

Context analysis is crucially important for ensuring quality study design and implementation, but also for understanding how, when and with whom to communicate and engage. The guidance box lists some indicative questions that are useful to consider in your analysis.

Page 1 of 10

EVIDENCE UPTAKE AND USE OBJECTIVES

Werecognise that your primary objective is to implement a high-quality study that producessound findings. As noted earlier, 3ie believes that the team’s role includes working throughout the study to ensure that key actors understand and support the study and subsequently understand the findings and how and why they are useful.

We would like you to summarise your main objectives for evidence uptake and use, in the light of the type of evidence that you expect to produce and the context in which it will be communicated. We encourage you to try and limit objectives to not more than three.

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS

Your engagement and evidence uptake and use objectives will help define your key stakeholders for the study and its findings.

A thorough mapping and analysis of stakeholders who are likely to be key in study implementation and the uptake of research findings is an important precursor to successful engagement and communication and reaching your objectives.

Stakeholders are actors that have the power to affect (positively or negatively) what you are doing or want to do or are actors that are affected (positively or negatively) by what you are doing or want to do. Stakeholders can be people, formal or informal organisations or institutions.

It is important to disaggregate entities as far as possible. For example, a community is not one homogenous entity; it needs to be disaggregated. Mothers, fathers, relatives in households, formal and informal community leaders and religious leaders are important to map and analyse.

Attention to who holds formal or informal power and how power relations are constructed will be central to your analysis at all levels.

For this exercise, the focus is on actors that will be centralto your engagement objectives, as well as detractorsthat may hinder your engagement and evidence uptake efforts.

Provide analysis of how and why these actors will be beneficial and how you plan on engaging with them.

Page 1 of 10

KEY INFLUENCERS

Identify at least three stakeholders (we would expect you to have more in most instances) with the potential to influence the uptake and use of study findings andexplain your selection.We would expect to see a range of key stakeholders or influencers that exercise power to influence and make change happen in different ways, formally and informally. Influencers can be in the community, parliament, the media, civil society (including community-based organisations), the private sector,religious organisations, traditional leaders, professional associations, elected officials and so on.

You may add additional contacts if you wish in separate sheets.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATION PLAN

Please provide a detailed plan for engaging relevant stakeholders throughout the study duration that you identified in your stakeholder analysis. You will report progress on those activities and provide supporting documents including list of participants, key takeaways or follow-up plans from meetings, presentations, blogs, articles, policy briefs, memos and other related knowledge products including publications.

• Meetings(formal and informal at any level: community, national, regional or global)
• Design, training or dissemination workshop
• Participation in online forums or working groups
• Media interviews, briefings, opinion pieces, social media or blogging
• Presentation at conferences
• Study outputs such as briefing notes,videos, podcasts
• Informal direct interactions

Note: The plan needs to align with your deliverables and disbursements (D&D) schedule. You will hence be asked to revisit the engagement plan once your D&D has been agreed to.

Page 1 of 10

MONITORING

You need a systematic approach for monitoring whether your stakeholder engagement and communicationplan is on track. Using Appendix 2: 3ie indicators, please list the indicators you will use and the tools for monitoring the same.

LEARNING

3ie encourages you to have a system in place for documenting learning from the study. The learning could be around study design, implementation and/or stakeholder engagement and communication. You could use a journal,or any othertool, to track what you have learnedand reportto 3ie.At the end of the study, as part of the final progress report, we will request you to produce a document that captures lessons learned from the study.

Given this, please elaborate on the activities that you will undertake to promote learning within the team and with your key counterpartsin the study.

Page 1 of 10