• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (2011 Evaluation Week)

Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (2011 Evaluation Week)



Presentation at the 2011 Evaluation Week

Presentation at the 2011 Evaluation Week



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Between 2006 and 2010 we have conducted these 8 evaluations of GPPs, and we should add the one we are presently evaluating, that is CGAP GDPRD (2007) ADEA ( 2005 and 2010) WSP ( ILC (2006) infoDev ( GRSF (2008) Cities Alliance (2008) Range of sectors: education road safety; water and sanitation; urban development; agriculture, access to land, Cycles: WSP was created in 1978, GFDisaster Reduction and Recovery was created in 2005 Different memberships
  • Scope and focus: increased demands from Members to expand the scope rather than focusing the questions - Program maturity influences evaluation purpose, scope and methodology Program in early stages (2-3 years) should assess the appropriateness of program design and review givernance and programme arrangements, clarity of objectives, etc. Established program: shoudl address inputs, program of activities and outputs Mature programs: should look at outputs and outcomes as well as sustainability Relevance of objectives : can be assessed against the existence of international consensus for the program (demand driven) alignemnt with beneficiary needs (supply side); subsidiary principle (vertical relevance) and absence of laternative (horizontal relevance) Relevance of design : appropriateness of strategies and priorities of the program for achieving the objectives of the program.
  • Less attention paid to efficiency of GRPP than development assistance Efficiency is the extent to which the program has converted its resoruces inputs economically into results in order to achieve the maximum possible outputs and outcomes Cost effectiveness is the extent to which the program has achieved its results at a lower costs compared with alternative
  • Need to plan for a realistic timetable Need to identify and manage these expectations from the beginning Need to validate Spécifier l’utilisation des données collectées Tension entre la demande pour un caractère représentatif des organes de gouvernance et la demande pour l’efficience-efficacité de la prise de décision Avoir une seule interface
  • As public problems have become more and more complex, there has been a realization that individual government agencies, working alone, can no longer handle these "wicked issues." Instead, there has been a growing emphasis on replacing categorical or program-based funding arrangements with more integrated efforts. These efforts have been the focus of recent work on collaborative endeavors involving a variety of network arrangements. The difficulty has been that although these types of collaborative efforts are increasing in number, a related growing concern is whether such arrangements have been any more effective than those involving single-agency efforts. As a result, interest has increased in evaluating these types of efforts. However, the evaluation measures used are those that apply to individual organizations, rather than network arrangements that often include not only representatives of public sector organizations but also representatives of nonprofit and private organizations as well as individuals and groups representing community interests. New ways are needed of evaluating performance in these network arrangements.
  • Team literature has focused on such variables as cohesiveness, size leadership, motivation and group goals. In recent years, composition has become a central concern, particularly regarding diversity. HOW DOES DIVERSITY affect team functioning, along such dimensions as cooperaiton, creativity, cohesiveness, and decision-making? What type of diversity matters? Do different types of diversity (demographic, functional, cultural, national, etc.) have different impacts on team functioning?
  • Social Capital : how a set of relationship amongst individuals or groups make these individuals or groups more productive or better performing. So, as such, rarely are we asked if as a results of being a member the actual members are more performing Does the existence of the netowrk facilitate social exchange on the given issue, greater knowledge mangement?

Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (2011 Evaluation Week) Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (2011 Evaluation Week) Presentation Transcript

  • Evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs IEG Week 2011 © Universalia
  • GRPP Evaluated
    • Cities Alliance
    • Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA)
    • Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery
    • Water and Sanitation Program
    • Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR)
    • The International Land Coalition
    • Global Road Safety Facility (GRSF)
    • Global Donor Platform for Rural Development
    • infoDev
    October 2011
  • Terms of Reference
    • Scope and focus comparable: relevance, efficacy, efficiency, sustainability, Management.
    • Limited links between evaluation questions and program maturity
    • Strong focus of relevance of objectives – less on relevance of design
    October 2011
  • Terms of Reference
    • Efficacy
      • Clear questions and appropriate resources allocated to evaluate inputs, progress of activities and outputs
      • Questions on outcomes tend to downplay outcomes multiplier, downstream effects , unintended effects, boundaries of effects
      • In general unsuficcient resources allocated to evaluating outcomes
    October 2011
  • Terms of Reference
    • GRPP include efficiency questions – they are difficult to answer
      • Changing scale and scope of GRPP
      • Absence of benchmark
    • Cost-effectiveness questions more difficult to answer often due to an absence of alternatives
    October 2011
  • GRPP Members
    • Diversity and multiplicity
      • More consultation, more participation, increased time requirements
      • Diverse expectations about the deliverables
    • Power shifts
      • Participation of large Foundations creates a new dynamics amongst the membership
      • Need to ensure that actual inbalance is not reflected in the evaluation
    • Effects of turnover
    October 2011
  • GRPP Members
    • Reporting evaluation results to members who are
      • Host
      • Member
      • Donor
      • Partner
      • Beneficiary
    • Potential conflict of roles, or goal displacement?
    October 2011
  • Structural Complexity of the GRPPs
    • The GRPPs represent various forms of networks:
      • Association
      • Facility
      • Coalition
      • Platform
      • Program
      • Partnership
    • Yet, evaluation of GRPPs draws significantly on organizational analysis literature
    October 2011
  • What Do We Know About Network Evaluation?
    • The literature on evaluation of networks and inter-organizational networking indicates that research has centered on the driving forces behind networks rather than on effectiveness of networks.
    • Effective GRPP governance should perhaps be examined through variables and indicators from the network literature or the team literature
    October 2011
    • Assesses team effectiveness through several predictors of team performance
      • Cohesiveness
      • Size
      • Leadership
      • Motivation
      • Goal group
      • Composition
    Team Literature October 2011
    • Assesses the effects of networks using several variables:
      • Social influence
      • Power
      • Social exchange
      • Knowledge Management
      • Social Capital
    Social Network Analysis October 2011
  • Conclusions
    • Additional tools are required for practitioners
    • Evaluations of GRPP requires sector expertise and experts familiar with organization, teams and network dynamics
    27/10/11 © Universalia