Abstract
Monitoring and evaluation (M&E), a new frontier for human-centered design (HCD), is still largely unexplored. In global health, M&E is considered essential to good practice, and evidence and data are critical tools in program design, performance monitoring, impact evaluation, and adaptation and learning. As HCD is increasingly integrated into global health practice, designers and global health practitioners are learning as they go how to integrate measurement into design and adapt traditional M&E approaches to design-influenced global health projects. This article illustrates some of the tensions inherent in the way global health and HCD practitioners approach measurement, using several cases to illustrate the ways in which tensions can be managed. Using framing introduced by the MeasureD project, which aimed to audit measurement practices in HCD (called social design in the MeasureD project), we explore 3 recent examples of design-influenced global health interventions: 1 focusing on products, 1 on behavior change, and 1 on service improvement, to extract learning about how teams used measurement, for what purpose, and to what effect. In comparing these examples and recent experience, we report on the steps being taken toward greater alignment in the use of measurement to advance human-centered global health programming.