MOE vs. M&E: Considering the difference between measuring strategic effectiveness and monitoring tactical evaluation

Abstract

Measuring the effectiveness of military Global Health Engagements (GHEs) has become an area of increasing interest to the military medical field. As a result, there have been efforts to more logically and rigorously evaluate GHE projects and programs; many of these have been based on the Logic and Results Frameworks. However, while these Frameworks are apt and appropriate planning tools, they are not ideally suited to measuring programs' effectiveness. This article introduces military medicine professionals to the Measures of Effectiveness for Defense Engagement and Learning (MODEL) program, which implements a new method of assessment, one that seeks to rigorously use Measures of Effectiveness (vs. Measures of Performance) to gauge programs' and projects' success and fidelity to Theater Campaign goals. While the MODEL method draws on the Logic and Results Frameworks where appropriate, it goes beyond their planning focus by using the latest social scientific and econometric evaluation methodologies to link on-the-ground GHE “lines of effort” to the realization of national and strategic goals and end-states. It is hoped these methods will find use beyond the MODEL project itself, and will catalyze a new body of rigorous, empirically based work, which measures the effectiveness of a broad spectrum of GHE and security cooperation activities. We based our strategies on the principle that it is much more cost-effective to prevent conflicts than it is to stop one once it's started. I cannot overstate the importance of our theater security cooperation programs as the centerpiece to securing our Homeland from the irregular and catastrophic threats of the 21st Century.—GEN James L. Jones, USMC (Ret.).