What Do Beneficiaries Think? Analysis of Data Collection Process From The Beneficiaries’ Point of View

This thesis examines the perspectives of beneficiaries of humanitarian aid and development projects on Beneficiary Feedback Mechanisms (BFMs), with first-hand research conducted in the context of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The sample population is selected among the beneficiaries of a local NGO, Caritas Jordan, that annually delivers over 130,000 services to about 35,000 beneficiaries (2023 data) in the fields of health, mental health, protection, humanitarian assistance, education, and livelihood. CJ employs various BFMs to monitor project success, including Feedback Calls, Focus Group Discussions, and Home Visits. A sample of 113 beneficiaries who experienced at least one of these mechanisms in 2024 was surveyed, assessing BFMs based on four criteria: perceived effectiveness of the mechanism, relationship with the interviewer, intrusiveness, and willingness to provide honest feedback. The findings reveal a correlation between the "closeness" of the mechanism to the beneficiaries and higher positive evaluations across three criteria; effectiveness, relationship with interviewer and intrusiveness, while honesty does not follow the same trend. Notably, results varied by nationality, with unexpected trends contradicting the assumption that Syrian beneficiaries would provide the highest ratings. Overall, BFMs are well-received, with beneficiaries expressing generally positive attitudes. However, the research identifies opportunities for enhancing the monitoring and evaluation process, offering a possibility for fostering a more beneficiary-centered approach. These findings contribute to a broader understanding of BFMs and their role in improving accountability and project outcomes in the humanitarian and development sectors.