The document defines evaluation as the systematic assessment of projects, programs, or policies, focusing on their design, implementation, and results. It outlines five key functions of evaluation: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impacts, and sustainability, which help assess the progress towards objectives and the overall value of programs. Ultimately, evaluation provides credible information to inform decision-making and improve program outcomes.

1. EVALUATION
FUNCTIONS OF EVALUATION
By: Shadrack Bentil

2. CONTENTS
A BRIEF DEFINITION OF EVALUATION
FUNCTIONS OF EVALUATION
SUMMARY
REFERNCES

3. EVALUATION DEFINED
Evaluation is the systematic assessment of an on-
going or completed project, program, or policy, and
its design, implementation and results as well as
programme performance, focusing on the analysis of
the progress made towards the achievement of the
stated objectives (Otieno, 2000; Sera & Beaudry,
2007).

4. KEY NOTE
Evaluation is a critical tool for forward-looking
strategic positioning, organizational learning
and for sound management of programs or
projects.

5. FUNCTIONS OF EVALUATION
Drawing from the key note above, the
following slides presents five key functions
of Evaluation

6. 1. RELEVANCE
 Evaluation helps to determine whether the objective and the goals match
the needs that are the program or the project seek to address.
 This provides an answer to the question:
Do the objectives and goals match the problems or needs that are being
addressed?

7. 2. EFFICIENCY
 Evaluation helps to find out whether the intended program or
project is being delivered timely and cost-effective manner.
 In terms of efficiencies, it further helps to identify areas for
improvement and ultimately help you realize your goals more
efficiently (Noar, 2006) cited in (CDC, 2008: 3)
 This answer questions like:
Is the project delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner?

8. 3. EFFECTIVENESS
 Evaluation improves effectiveness. It helps to discover the extent to
which supportive factors and obstacles encountered during
implementation has affected the program positively or negatively.
 Thus, it is important to periodically assess and adapt your activities to
ensure they are as effective as they can be (Hornik, 2002).
 In this regard, evaluation can answers question like:
What are the supportive factors and obstacles encountered during the
implementation?

9. 4. IMPACTS
 Evaluation helps to find out whether the intended target group
and beneficiaries of the program or projects have yielded the
desired as well as attracting and retaining support from current
and potential funders (Hornik & Yanovitzky, 2003).
 This includes both the negative and positive effects of the
program or projects. i.e. the full range of impacts at all levels of
the results chain, including ripple effects on families, households
and communities; on institutional, technical or social systems;
and on the environment.

10. Cont.
The question, What happened as a result
of the project? Can be answered during
and after evaluation.

11. 5. SUSTAINABILITY:
 Evaluation improves program design and implementation as well
as the long lasting benefit after the intervention is completed. This
enables the program managers to build confidence in the
continuous success or progress of the program.
 The information you collect allows you to better communicate the
program’s impact to others, which is critical for staff morale to
continue or discontinue the project or program.

12. Cont.
That is, it addresses questions like:
 Are there lasting benefits after the intervention is
completed?
 Should the program be terminated or continued?

13. SUMMARY
 In general terms, Evaluation checks accountability measures the worth
of a program or project.
 However, in specific and comprehensive terms, Evaluation aims at
determining the relevance and fulfillment of objectives, development
efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability.
 An evaluation provides information that is credible and useful, enabling
the incorporation of lessons learned into the decision making process
at all levels of the program or project.

14. REFERNCES
CDC (2008) Using Evaluation to Improve Programs Strategic Planning.
Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/. Date accessed: 01.07.2016
Hornik, R. C. (2002). Epilogue: Evaluation design for public health communication programs. In
Robert C. Hornik (Ed.), Public Health Communication: Evidence for Behavior Change. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Hornik, R. C. & Yanovitzky, I. (2003). Using theory to design evaluations of communication
campaigns: The case of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. Communication
Theory, 13(2), 204-224.

15. Cont.
Otieno, F. (2000, November). The roles of monitoring and evaluation in projects.
In Proceedings: 2nd CIB W107 Construction in Developing Countries International
Conference on Challenges Facing the Construction Industry in Developing Countries.
Gaborone, Botswana (pp. 15-17).
Sera, Y. & Beaudry, S. (2007). Monitoring & Evaluation-World Bank. Available at:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTBELARUS/Resources/M&E.pdf. Date Accessed:
01.07.2016