The document outlines the progress of the CGIAR evaluation function, emphasizing its role as a key instrument for accountability and learning within the organization. It details completed and ongoing evaluations, support structures for various CRPs, and timelines for future evaluations, along with the strategic objectives of enhancing management, accountability, and transparency. Key recommendations for improvement and processes surrounding CRP proposals are also discussed, highlighting the importance of building a culture of evaluation across CGIAR.

1. CGIAR Evaluation Community of Practice
Workshop
The CGIAR evaluation function: Progress so far and
where does this feed into?
September
2014

2. CGIAR Evaluation Strategic Objective
Ensuring that the evaluation function is a key and
effective instrument of accountability and
learning, fully contributing to the shaping and
vision of the future CGIAR

3. IEA = Who We Are
• CGIAR system entity: small unit based in FAO
• Reports to Fund Council through biannual meetings and
Evaluation and Impact Assessment Committee (EIAC)
• Operates in close consultation with Consortium Office
• Works closely with Centers/CRPs
• Collaborates with ISPC, including SPIA

4. How IEA fits into to CGIAR

5. IEA – Reviews & Evaluations
1 CRP
evaluation
completed
+ Mgmt
Response
Forests, Trees &
Agroforestry
2 Reviews
completed
+ Mgmt
Response
Generation
Challenge
Program
CRP
Governance
&
Management
4 ongoing CRP
evaluations
(TORs/IRs):
PIM
AAS
WHEAT
MAIZE
5 CRP evaluations
in planning and
preparatory work
(TORs):
CCAFS
GRISP
L&F
RTB
WLE

6. CRP- Commissioned Evaluations
• IEA structured support on quality assurance
to 5 CRP Commissioned Evaluations
(requested by FC) :
– Dryland Cereals, Dryland Systems, Grain Legumes,
A4NH, and HumidTropics
• IEA support and guidance to CCEEs:
– On-demand basis (planning, selection of
consultants, TORs, evaluation governance)
– Extensive use of IEA standards and guidance notes

7. IEA Evaluations– timeline
2013 2014 2015 2016
Forests, Trees and Agroforestry
Policies, Institutions & Markets
Maize
Wheat
Aquatic Agricultural Systems
Livestock and Fish
Roots, Tubers, and Bananas
Water, Land and Ecosystems
Climate Change, Agri & Food Security
Global Rice Science Partnership
QA Support to 5 CRPS: Dryland Systems, Dryland
Cereals, Grain Legumes, A4NH, and Humidtropics

8. For Whom/ What Purpose?
CRP Management
• Learning for strategic management and
adaptations and adjustments of program
• Preparation: 2nd cycle of CRP proposals
System-wide
• System wide strategic management
(MTR, SRF, 2nd call for funding)
• Resource for system-wide evaluation
Evaluation
Donors
• Accountability on program performance
• Building trust and transparency
• Strategic and informed decisions on
portfolio and funding allocations
Partners
• Build trust and transparency
• Accountability on partnership and
program performance
• Refinement of partnership

9. System-level reviews – mid-term review
Examine the progress of the CGIAR reforms, and the resulting
appropriateness, effectiveness, and efficiency of the overall system
and make recommendations for course correction and improvements
where necessary.
Commissioned by: Fund Council
Evaluators: Independent Panel
Timeline: Results of the review and final recommendations will be
discussed/adopted at the forthcoming Fund Council meeting for Year
2014.
Links: TORs and Inception report (April 2014)

10. CRP extensions and 2nd call for proposals
Consortium Board and Fund Council decision:
• Extend (and refresh) the current CRPs to the end of 2016 (with
Extension proposals for 2015-16 in 2014);
• Develop proposals for the second stage with the benefit of the
conclusions and recommendations of both the Mid-term Review of
the Reform, and forms of external evaluation for all CRPs.

11. CRP 2nd call for proposals: process
• March 2015: CRPs submit Pre-Proposals on-line.
• July - September 2015: Review by CO and ISPC and CRPs submit revised proposals
• November 2015: CB and FC determine which proposals, and/or key components,
are to be developed into full proposals
• March 2016: invited CRPs submit Full Proposals
• April - September 2016: six months for ISPC, CO, and FO and to review the
proposals
• September 2016: A full set of (a) CRP proposals; (b) ISPC reviews; and (c) CO FO, IEA
evaluations available for review and feedback from CB and FC members
• November 2016: CB and FC complete funding /approval decisions

12. Scope of CRP Evaluation
Broad scope: Relevance, QoS, Effectiveness,
impacts, sustainability, efficiency
Summative
– Results of past research which is continuing in CRP
Formative
– Programmatic approach in enhancing relevance and
efficiency of CRP
– Likelihood of effectiveness to contribute to SRF
vision, SLOs and outcomes

13. Monitoring and impact assessment feed into
evaluation
Uptake,
Influence
Outcomes Adoption
SPIA
Inputs
Progress
CRP
E V A L U A T I O N
Impact
O
u
t
p
u
t
s
- 10-20 years - 5-10 years- 4-8 years Current research

14. Some challenges
• The evaluand: is a moving target: several iterations
of structural changes since the initial proposal
• Monitoring and Evaluation capacity and systems
uneven across CGIAR – The “building blocks” are
not there
• No clear accountability and learning framework at
CRP and system levels

15. The role of the Evaluation Community
of Practice in meeting our strategic
objective

16. • Strengthen the culture of evaluation across
CGIAR
• Network and share information
• Build capacity and strengthen coordinated
planning and cooperation
• Strengthen the collective voice of evaluation in
the system

17. At CRP
level:
Evaluation
building
blocks
Blue-internal,
Green – external
P- research project level
Sub – sub themes &
components
THEMES AND CROSS-CUTTING
S
U
B
S
U
B
S
U
B
S
U
B
S
U
B
S
U
B
P P P
P P P
P P
P
P
P P P P P P P
P P
P
P
P P P P P P
P P P P P P P
P
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P P
P
P
P
P P
P P P
P P
P
P
P
P
P
MONITORING INPUTS AND INDICATORS