E V A L U E R I N G S K O N F E R A N S E N 2 0 1 3
D R A M M E N , N O R G E
N I E L S D A B E L S T E I N
DESIGNING FOR ...
2
“I can honestly say that not a day goes by when we don’t use
those evaluations in one way or another.”
Written by Mark M...
DEFINITION OF EVALUATION (DAC)
An assessment, as systematic and objective as
possible, of an on-going or completed project...
USEFULNES/UTILITY
Evaluation must serve the information needs of the
intended primary users.
MULTIPLE TARGET GROUPS (USERS)
• Internal:
• Management
• Operational staff
• Partners
• External:
• Parliament/policy mak...
INTERNAL FEEDBACK
• Follow-up Memo
• Department/Senior management
• Discussion in Management group
• Workshops / Seminars ...
EXTERNAL DISSEMINATION
• Evaluation Report
• 4 page summary
• Presentations in partner countries
• 25 page ”popular versio...
THE EVALUATION OF
THE PARIS DECLARATION
In 2005 130+ countries’ donors and agencies
committed to improve development effec...
A JOINT EVALUATION
• Based on the principles of the Paris Declaration:
partner countries and development partners
develope...
EVALUATION COMPONENTS
Country Evaluations & Donor Studies
ENSURING UTILITY
• Legitimacy of the evaluation (mandate)
• Genuine participation of primary stakeholders
• Transparency, ...
TENSIONS # 1
The tension between
stakeholder involvement
and
evaluator independence
impartiality.
15
TENSION # 2
The tension between
strength of evidence
and
delivering the findings
on time
A BALANCING ACT:
STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE VS. TIMELINESS
17
On
Time
DISSEMINATION INSTRUMENTS
• 55 Reports (synthesis (2), country and donor
evaluations, special studies, meta evaluation)
• ...
USEFUL LINKS
www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/evaluationofthe
implementationoftheparisdeclaration.htm
www.evaluering.dk
Evalueringskonferansen 2013: Niels Dabelstein
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Evalueringskonferansen 2013: Niels Dabelstein

245 views
201 views

Published on

Niels Dabelstein 19.09.13:
Designing for effective evaluation feedback

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
245
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evalueringskonferansen 2013: Niels Dabelstein

  1. 1. E V A L U E R I N G S K O N F E R A N S E N 2 0 1 3 D R A M M E N , N O R G E N I E L S D A B E L S T E I N DESIGNING FOR EFFECTIVE EVALUATION FEEDBACK
  2. 2. 2 “I can honestly say that not a day goes by when we don’t use those evaluations in one way or another.” Written by Mark M. Rogers and illustrated by Lawson Sworh
  3. 3. DEFINITION OF EVALUATION (DAC) An assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of an on-going or completed project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and result. - to determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. - be credible, timely, and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision- making process of recipients and donors.
  4. 4. USEFULNES/UTILITY Evaluation must serve the information needs of the intended primary users.
  5. 5. MULTIPLE TARGET GROUPS (USERS) • Internal: • Management • Operational staff • Partners • External: • Parliament/policy makers • Opinion makers/leaders • General public • Academics/researchers/students • External Resource base • NGOs
  6. 6. INTERNAL FEEDBACK • Follow-up Memo • Department/Senior management • Discussion in Management group • Workshops / Seminars / Training • Contribute to policy, strategy & guidelines • Annual report to Board
  7. 7. EXTERNAL DISSEMINATION • Evaluation Report • 4 page summary • Presentations in partner countries • 25 page ”popular version” (in local languages) • Press conference/seminar • Video/film • Eval’s annual report to Board • Danida’s annual report • Udvikling – Danidas bi-monthly magazine • Public meetings/Professional Associations • Lectures Universities/high Schools • WWW
  8. 8. THE EVALUATION OF THE PARIS DECLARATION In 2005 130+ countries’ donors and agencies committed to improve development effectiveness by improving: •Ownership •Alignment •Harmonization •Managing for Results •Mutual Accountability
  9. 9. A JOINT EVALUATION • Based on the principles of the Paris Declaration: partner countries and development partners developed the evaluation framework/approach jointly • The evaluation itself was a tool for mutual accountability: • 22 Country-level evaluations led by partner countries and managed in-country • 18 Donor/agency HQ studies
  10. 10. EVALUATION COMPONENTS
  11. 11. Country Evaluations & Donor Studies
  12. 12. ENSURING UTILITY • Legitimacy of the evaluation (mandate) • Genuine participation of primary stakeholders • Transparency, communication and knowledge sharing. http://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/PDE • Dissemination /communication strategy • Plain language (trilingual) • Timeliness
  13. 13. TENSIONS # 1 The tension between stakeholder involvement and evaluator independence impartiality.
  14. 14. 15
  15. 15. TENSION # 2 The tension between strength of evidence and delivering the findings on time
  16. 16. A BALANCING ACT: STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE VS. TIMELINESS 17 On Time
  17. 17. DISSEMINATION INSTRUMENTS • 55 Reports (synthesis (2), country and donor evaluations, special studies, meta evaluation) • Free standing summaries of synthesis reports • 9 Thematic policy briefs (5+4) • Everything on www • 36 national and international meetings and workshops • Video and film on www and Facebook
  18. 18. USEFUL LINKS www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/evaluationofthe implementationoftheparisdeclaration.htm www.evaluering.dk

×