Monitoring processes tend to emphasise quantitative data based on existing information systems and data bases. However, monitoring is always strengthened by the use of qualitative methods. It may be necessary to commission special studies or participatory research, to examine particular problems encountered or learning around programme effects on specific target groups of children. The extent of qualitative data collection will depend on the information needs of decision-makers, time and resource availability.

Evaluation processes necessarily depend on both quantitative and qualitative methods, drawing on both primary and secondary data sources, in order to adequately address higher-level results achievement and the identification of lessons learned.

There are limitations and constraints with any methodology or source of data. Extensive reliance on primary sources of data and participatory research takes time and resources. On the other hand, there can be important limitations to secondary data sources in terms of what variables are covered, whether the data is disaggregated by sex and age, and how reliable the data source is.

As a general rule, using both primary and secondary sources of information, as well as both qualitative and quantitative methods, complement each other and mitigate against threats to data reliability and validity. The methodological guidelines in the TOR should require consultants to justify their choices of both data sources and mixed methodologies.

For more information on data sources and methods for child rights: see UNICEF & World Bank Resource Pack on Integrating a Child Focus into Poverty and Social Impact Analysis, section 3.1, p. 27.