Democratic evaluation is a participatory approach that promotes inclusion, dialogue, transparency and accountability. It focuses on engaging stakeholders in evaluating policies and programs. The key aspects are inclusion of all groups, dialogue to clarify views, and deliberation to reach consensus. Challenges include lack of political will, interference and resource constraints. Advantages are supporting democracy and empowering citizens through participation.

1. Democratic Evaluation
Presented by Judith Agada, Ahmed Warsame Idle, Aniso Mahdi

2. Let’s Share Your Thoughts
 What comes to mind when you hear democratic evaluation?
 What skills should a democratic evaluator possess?

3. Contents
 Introduction to Democratic Evaluation
 Some Scholars that Contributed to Democratic Evaluation
 Purpose/Elements of Democratic Evaluation
 Key steps for Carrying out Democratic Evaluation
 Challenges and Solutions for Democratic Evaluation
 Advantages and Disadvantages of Democratic Evaluation
 Personal Experience
 Conclusion
 Reflection
 References

4. Democratic Evaluation
 Democratic evaluation is a form of utilization focused evaluation that promotes inclusion, dialogue, deliberation,
transparency, accountability and collaboration in policy formulation and implementation. Utilization-Focused
Evaluation (UFE), developed by Michael Quinn Patton, is an approach based on the principle that an evaluation
should be judged on its usefulness to its intended users.
 The opposite of Democratic evaluation is autocratic evaluation which according to MacDonald is an
evaluation approach that serves government agencies in control over the allocation of resources.
 Democratic evaluation awakens the consciousness of evaluation as a political activity, one which influences the
distribution of goods and opportunities in our societies (MacDonald, 1978).
 It generally focuses on inclusive practices which foster participation and collaboration. Democratic evaluation
gets the buy in of people by promoting a sense of ownership of monitoring and evaluation processes and results
through its participatory mechanism.

5. Let’s Meet Some Scholars that Contributed to Democratic
Evaluation
Ashcraft Catherine Howe Kenneth
Elster John Anders Hanberger
Shirley Chislom
Michael Quinn Patton
Barry Macdonald

6. Purpose/Elements of Democratic Evaluation
Inclusion: The principle of inclusion requires that all groups with a significant interest
‘‘stakeholders’’ are included in the evaluation of a program or policy. Inclusion can be passive or
active
Dialogue: Dialogue ranges from elucidating to critical. Elucidating dialogue involves clarifying the
views and self understandings of research participants while critical dialogue goes a step further
by subjecting these views and self-understandings to rational scrutiny.
Deliberation: The deliberative democratic approach is conceived as a method that mitigates
inequalities in power among stakeholders. Devices such as establishing minority caucuses can be
used to canvass minority opinions to better approximate freedom and equality
Accountability: Evaluation in democracy can be used to drive accountability for promises made
and policy formulation and implementation. Accountability can be accessed through Propriety,
Quality, Efficacy, Positive change and Sustainable impact

7. Democratic
Orientation
Intended
use/function
Evaluation focus Inclusion Dialogue Deliberation Evaluator’s roles
EDE for the
people
(Schumpeter)
Elite learning,
rational feedback,
accountability
Intended outputs
and outcomes,
Goal achievement
Policy and
programme makers
Not
important
Not important Expert
PDE by the people
(Pateman)
Self-learning,
Self-determination,
empowerment
People’s own
needs,
Goal development,
Steps forward
Programme
implementers,
Self-governed
citizens/clients
Very
important
Important Advocate
Facilitator
coach
DDE with the
people (Dryzek
Habermas,
Gutmann and
Thompson)
Collective learning,
Justification,
Public debate
Stakeholder’s
criteria,
Authentic
discourse,
Intended and
unintended
outcomes
All legitimate
stakeholders
Very
important
Very important Mediator
counsellor
Democratic Evaluation Orientations
Source- Anders Hanberger (2006). Evaluation of and for Democracy

8. Key steps for Carrying out Democratic Evaluation
Identify Primary Users/Beneficiaries of the Evaluation
Identify Purpose/Objective of Evaluation
Gain Commitment/buy in of Stakeholders for Evaluation
Decide on Evaluation Methods and Processes
Collect Data and Findings
Analyze and Validate Findings
Disseminate Evaluation Findings

9. Challenges and Solutions for Democratic Evaluation
Challenges
• Lack of Political will and resistance
to evaluation: Political class
sometimes see evaluators,
the ones that were not hired by
them as people who wants to
ridicule their projects.
• Political Interference in Evaluation
process: Political elites sometimes
try to interfere in evaluation to
score some political points and
unwavering support from the
people
Solutions
• Lack of Political will and resistance
to evaluation: Evaluator provides
adequate information to the
class on the importance of
evaluation, whose aim is not to
disrepute government projects, but
improve the projects and bridge
through learnings.
• Political Interference in Evaluation
process: Evaluator ensures that a
fair process is used in the evaluation
along all steps on evaluation
process.

10. Challenges and Solutions for Democratic Evaluation Contd
Challenges
• Insufficient understanding of the
evaluation function: Sometimes,
project stakeholders may not be fully
aware of the importance of evaluation
and may perceive it as an activity that
does not bring any direct development
to their community
• Limited resources and time
consumption: Limited resources and
time consumption: Democratic
evaluation can be time consuming
would require a lot of funding as a
significant number of the population
will be involved in several steps of the
Solutions
• Insufficient understanding of the
evaluation function: Evaluator provides
proper orientation to project
stakeholders on the importance of
evaluation and how it will inform
project implementation, improve
project implementation and influence
policy and programme decision
• Limited resources and time
consumption: Limited resources and
time consumption: This can be
resolved by engaging a team of
evaluators so that evaluation activities
can be carried out simultaneously.
Evaluation should also be budgeted for

11. Advantages and Disadvantages of Democratic
Evaluation
Advantages of Democratic evaluation would include supporting democratic
process through strengthening the principles of inclusion, transparency and
accountability in democracies by holding the political class accountable to
commitments. Democratic evaluation also supports the process of policy
formulation and implementation by generating substantial findings through
informed evaluation process. It contributes to policy learning and practical
knowledge generation for general public’s information needs. Democratic
evaluation also helps to empower the citizens by affected citizens benefit from
planned projects and also engaging them in evaluation process to strengthen
the programs
Advantages
Disadvantages of Democratic Evaluation would be that it is time consuming
does not give room for rapid decision making as due process must be
Inputs from a large range of stakeholders lead to a situation where different
stakeholders have conflicting decisions, this would require evaluator to be
skilled in conflict resolution and compromise setting
Disadvantage

12. Personal Experiences
Story Telling on Case Study

13. Conclusion
Democratic evaluation can empower to both government and citizens by way of
strengthening and upholding democratic values while addressing issues of equity and
inclusion by engaging practitioners in dialogue and deliberation about programs and
policies. It can be used at the same time to strengthen government systems and legitimize
policies and structures through active participation of the citizens in evaluation process.

14. Reflection
 What orientation of Democratic Evaluation would you prefer to lead as an
Evaluator
A) Elitist Democracy-oriented Evaluation,
B) Participatory Democracy-oriented Evaluation
C) Discursive Democracy-oriented Evaluation

15. References
 Anders Hanberger (2006). Evaluation of and for Democracy, SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks and
New Delhi) DOI: 10.1177/1356389006064194 Vol 12(1)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251753089_Evaluation_of_and_for_Democracy
 Farazmand, Ali (1999) ‘The Elite Question: Toward a Normative Elite Theory of Organization’, Administration
and Society https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00953999922019166
 Harvard Family Research Project (2005). Democratic Evaluation Approaches for Equity and Inclusion. Volume
XI, Number 3 https://archive.globalfrp.org/evaluation/the-evaluation-exchange/issue-archive/democratic-
evaluation/democratic-evaluation-approaches-for-equity-and-inclusion
 Howe, R. K and Ashcraft, C. (2005). Deliberative Democratic Evaluation: Successes and Limitations of an
Evaluation of School Choicehttps://www.colorado.edu/education/sites/default/files/attached-
files/Howe&Ashcraft_Deliberative_Democratic_Evaluation.pdf
 https://www.betterevaluation.org/en/plan/approach/democratic_evaluation
 MacDonald, Barry (1978) ‘Democracy and Evaluation’, public address at the Universityof Alberta Faculty of
Education, 17 Oct https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.923.897&rep=rep1&type=pdf