M&E Review
Professional monitoring, evaluation, accountability and learning (MEAL) skills for Claude.
Paste a logframe, theory of change, M&E plan, survey, evaluation TOR, sampling plan, baseline report, progress report, proposal, or indicator list and get a structured quality review in seconds.
Built by M&E Studio.
New in 1.4.0: the plugin now ships as its own marketplace, so installation is two commands (see below). Each review is a single self-contained skill.
New in 1.3.0: six additional reviews covering theories of change, proposal M&E sections, sampling plans, data quality assessments, baseline reports and progress reports. Twelve reviews in total.
What It Does
| Skill | Use It When You Have... |
|---|---|
/me-review:logframe-review |
A logframe or results framework to check for logic gaps, weak indicators and missing assumptions |
/me-review:theory-of-change-review |
A theory of change, causal pathway or results chain to check for logical coherence and assumption quality |
/me-review:indicator-quality |
A list of indicators to score against SMART and CREAM criteria |
/me-review:me-plan-review |
An M&E plan, MEAL plan, PMP or MEL plan to assess for completeness and feasibility |
/me-review:proposal-me-review |
The M&E section of a proposal, grant application or concept note |
/me-review:tor-review |
An evaluation TOR or SOW to review for methodological rigor, scope and budget realism |
/me-review:survey-review |
A survey, questionnaire, KII guide or FGD guide to check for design quality and ethics |
/me-review:sampling-plan-review |
A sampling plan, sample size calculation or sampling frame to check for method appropriateness |
/me-review:baseline-report-review |
A baseline report or pre-intervention study to check for indicator coverage and target validation |
/me-review:progress-report-review |
A quarterly, annual or donor progress report to check for data plausibility and variance explanation |
/me-review:data-quality-review |
A DQA report, data quality audit or verification report to check for VIPRT coverage and rigor |
/me-review:evaluation-report-review |
A final evaluation report to assess for quality, evidence anchoring and limitations |
Each skill produces a scored review with section-by-section ratings (PASS / PARTIAL / FAIL), a summary verdict, and prioritized recommendations.
Installation
Two commands. This repository is its own plugin marketplace, so you add it once and then install from it.
/plugin marketplace add monitoringevaluationstudio/me-review
/plugin install me-review@me-review
Run these inside Claude Code. If the install summary says Run /reload-plugins to activate., run that too.
To check it worked, type /me-review: and you should see all twelve reviews listed.
Claude Desktop users can install the same plugin through the plugin browser in Settings.
How to Use
Type a slash command, then paste your document:
Logframe review:
/me-review:logframe-review
Objective: Improved health outcomes for rural women
Output 1: 500 health workers trained
Output 2: 12 health facilities upgraded
Indicator: Number of women accessing services (target: 10,000)
Theory of change review:
/me-review:theory-of-change-review
[paste your theory of change, causal pathway, or results chain here]
Indicator quality check:
/me-review:indicator-quality
1. Number of health workers trained (target: 500)
2. % of facilities with adequate supplies (baseline: 42%)
3. Women's empowerment improved
Evaluation TOR review:
/me-review:tor-review
[paste your evaluation TOR here]
M&E plan review:
/me-review:me-plan-review
[paste your M&E plan, MEL plan, PMP, or MEAL plan here]
Sampling plan review:
/me-review:sampling-plan-review
Population: 12,400 households across 3 districts
Method: Two-stage cluster sampling, 40 clusters of 15 households
Sample size: 600, calculated for 5% margin of error at 95% confidence
Disaggregation required: sex of household head, district
Evaluation report review:
/me-review:evaluation-report-review
FINDINGS
Finding 1: Student learning improved 23% on average (treatment: 65%, control: 53%)
- Evidence: Pre/post learning assessments in 60 schools, 4,800 students
- Limitations: Comparison group non-randomly selected; causality estimates may reflect contextual differences
Finding 2: Teacher practice improved significantly (78% competency-based teaching in treatment vs. 12% in control)
- Evidence: Classroom observations using validated rubric, 240 observations across sites
- Limitation: Self-selection of trained teachers may bias estimates
RECOMMENDATIONS
Priority 1: Scale to 200 additional schools by 2025 ($1.86M investment)
Priority 2: Establish peer learning networks to sustain practice changes
Priority 3: Conduct 2-year follow-up to verify learning gains persist
Survey review:
/me-review:survey-review
[paste your survey, questionnaire, or KII guide here]
Claude will review the document and return a structured report.
You can also just paste a document without typing a command. Claude will detect what it is and apply the right review automatically.
More free M&E resources
This plugin is one part of a free toolkit for M&E practitioners.
| Resource | What it is |
|---|---|
| AI prompt library | Task-specific prompts for M&E work, in English, Spanish and French |
| Free M&E tools | Sampling calculator, DQA scorecard, SMART indicator checker, method selector, evaluation readiness check |
| M&E reference library | Plain-language entries on M&E methods, terms and comparisons |
| Method guides | Step-through guides for planning and running evaluations |
| Plugin page | Installation help and what each skill checks |
License
MIT License. Copyright (c) 2026 MEStudio
