http://www.gsdrc.org Academic and policy-relevant publications on governance and international development. en-uk Copyright © 2012 Governance and Social Development Resource Centre Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:00:11 GMT Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:00:11 GMT http://www.gsdrc.org/rss/open george@gsdrc.org george@gsdrc.org http://www.gsdrc.org/images/logos/logo_gsdrc.gif http://www.gsdrc.org 205 90 GSDRC logo Asian Development Bank How can impact be credibly attributed to a particular intervention? This report discusses the merits and limitations of various methods and offers practical guidance on impact evaluation. A rigorously conducted impact evaluation produces reliable impact estimates of an intervention through careful construction of the counterfactual using experimental or non-experimental approaches. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4220&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4220&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT DFID Does formal recognition of a right to sanitation (RTS) increase levels of availability and access to quality, affordable and adaptable sanitation services? This study finds that progress towards these goals seems to be faster in countries that have recognised an RTS. It is highly probable that sanitation services in countries seeking to fulfil an RTS will be more equitable and inclusive than elsewhere. However, attributing successes to a rights approach will require better monitoring and evaluation that includes rights-sensitive indicators. A further finding is that what makes formal recognition meaningful is a participatory approach to working to fulfil rights: citizen-state engagement is crucial. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4210&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4210&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT Katherine Casey, Rachel Glennerster and Edward Miguel 'Community driven development' (CDD) has become a popular donor strategy in seeking to improve local institutions in developing countries. This study evaluates a CDD project in Sierra Leone that combined block grants for local public goods with intensive training and requirements for minority inclusion designed to catalyse collective action and empowerment. The study finds positive short-term effects on local public goods provision and economic outcomes, but no sustained impacts on collective action, decision-making processes, or the involvement of marginalised groups in local affairs. It also indicates the value of a pre-analysis plan in avoiding distorted results. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4182&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4182&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT Chris Barnett et al. How can value for money best be measured in governance and conflict programming? This study reviews options for a VFM approach in relation to governance programmes, including those in conflict-affected and failed states, for the UK's Department for International Development. VFM involves examining economy, efficiency and effectiveness, identifying the links between them and drawing conclusions based on evidence about how well they perform together. It is an optimal balance that is important, as opposed to a maximum productivity ratio. The cheapest option does not always represent the best value for money. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4115&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4115&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT OECD-DAC The OECD-DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation, built through international consensus, provide a guide to good practice. They are not intended to be used as a development evaluation manual, but they outline the key quality dimensions for each phase of a typical evaluation process: defining purpose, planning, designing, implementing, reporting, and learning from and using evaluation results. Principles informing the whole of the evaluation process are transparency and independence; integrity and respect for diversity; partnership, coordination and alignment; capacity development; and quality control. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4114&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4114&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT Chris Barnett et al. How can a robust and clear set of indicators be established to monitor effectively the progress of a programme? Which indicators show best that a programme has achieved what it set out to achieve? This study tests the relevance and robustness of a list of indicators for the Department for International Development's (DFID's) conflict and governance programmes. The list consists of fifteen separate sets, or suites, of outcome and output indicators and covers a spectrum of related programme areas, including security and justice, elections, civil service reform and corruption. It suggests that a good results framework that enables programme progress to be effectively monitored and explained is critical, particularly in times of financial austerity. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4113&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4113&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT Howard White There is a debate in the field of impact evaluation (IE) between those promoting quantitative approaches and those calling for a larger range of approaches to be used. This paper highlights four misunderstandings that have arisen in this debate. They involve: 1) crucially, different definitions of 'impact' – one based on outcomes and long term effects, and one referring to attribution; 2) confusion between counterfactuals and control groups; 3) confusion of 'attribution' with sole attribution; and 4) unfounded criticism of quantitative methods as 'positivist' and 'linear'. There is no hierarchy of methods, but quantitative approaches are often the best available. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4103&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4103&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT Howard White How can impact evaluation identify not just what does – or does not – work, but why? A theory-based approach to impact evaluation maps out the causal chain from inputs to outcomes and impact, and tests the underlying assumptions. Despite wide agreement that this approach will address the why question, it has not often been effectively used. This paper outlines six principles for successful theory-based impact evaluation: (1) map out the causal chain (programme theory); (2) understand context; (3) anticipate heterogeneity; (4) rigorously evaluate impact using a credible counterfactual; (5) use rigorous factual analysis; and (6) use mixed methods. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4102&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4102&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT Melody Garcia Although billions of dollars have been invested on improving governance in developing countries in the past decade, few of the programmes that have received funding have been subjected to rigorous impact evaluation. The aims of the paper are to: (i) discuss the challenges in evaluating governance programmes, (ii) identify some aspects of governance that have been rigorously evaluated, and finally (iii) provide practical recommendations based from previous evaluation experience. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4101&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4101&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT Nicola Jones et al. What can be learned from the many impact evaluations (IEs) carried out by development agencies in recent years? This review highlights the need and growing demand for greater and more strategic coordination of IE efforts, and notes insufficient attention to diverse methodological approaches to evaluation. It is important in all policy sectors to reflect on the suitability of methods to development questions and to invest in the development of impact evaluations informed by methodological pluralism. Developing country evaluation capacity, early stakeholder involvement in IEs, and the dissemination of clear policy implications should also be supported. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4100&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4100&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT Harry Jones and Simon Hearn What is Outcome Mapping (OM) and why is it valuable? When does it work best? How can donors facilitate its use? This note draws on case studies to review OM – a flexible, actor- and learning-centred approach to planning, monitoring, and evaluating social change initiatives. It finds that adopting OM for appropriate projects could help development agencies to increase their effectiveness and meet commitments to managing for results. OM is well-suited to areas involving complex change processes, capacity building work, and knowledge and decision-making processes. Shifting to OM's learning-oriented mode requires donors to adopt more realistic expectations and to dispense with the idea of 'controlling' change processes. Crucially, OM must be underpinned by real trust between the donor, project implementers and partners. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4098&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4098&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT Devra C. Moehler Are field experiments useful in studying the impact of development assistance on democracy and governance (DG)? This article reviews recent and ongoing DG field experiments. It considers the prospects for and obstacles to the development of a useful body of experimental evidence on the political economy of development. There are significant challenges related to the difficulty of generalising from small samples and micro-level projects. However, although the field experiments have tended towards village-level interventions, they suggest that impact evaluations can potentially address higher-level interventions and theories. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4097&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4097&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT Harry Jones Is it possible to monitor and evaluate effectively efforts to influence policy? This paper provides an overview of approaches to the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of policy influencing activities. It suggests that while M&E in this field is challenging, information can be generated that can be used to improve programmes and provide accountability for funds. The key is for policy influencing teams to recognise the value of M&E to their work and to incorporate it into their practices from the beginning of a project or programme. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4096&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4096&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT Iñigo Retolaza What is a Theory of Change (ToC) and why is it important? This guide to understanding and developing a ToC shows how a ToC helps to configure the conditions needed to achieve desired change, using the experience of a given context. This is done partly by making assumptions explicit and by analysing them critically. It is also a monitoring tool that facilitates accountability. A good ToC allows development practitioners to handle complexity without over-simplification. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4095&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4095&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Sat, 01 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT James Morton Why is M&E still not being carried out effectively? This paper is a practitioner's response to current debates on M&E and aid effectiveness. It examines the technical side of M&E and the latest thinking on complexity, arguing that current methodological debates are red herrings. It highlights the underlying incentive structures that create the need for M&E, but do not create a sincere demand for the impact assessments that M&E is designed to produce. The aid industry's default setting is lesson suppression, not lesson learning. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4094&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4094&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT Ben Ramalingam and Harry Jones et al. What is complexity science? How can it contribute to development and humanitarian efforts? This paper explores the key concepts of complexity science and shows how they might help development practitioners engaged in reform. The concepts highlight that the best course of action will be context-dependent, and they offer new ways to think about questions that should be posed. Development practitioners need to recognise that they live with complexity on a daily basis, and to use the 'complexity lens'. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4093&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4093&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT Alex Jacobs How can development agencies implement feedback systems so as to hear systematically from the intended beneficiaries of their work? How can such systems improve aid accountability, and thus effectiveness? This article focuses on agricultural development, arguing that in most agricultural development projects, quantified summaries of smallholder farmers' views can be collected. Such data can provide real-time performance indicators that incentivise staff to focus on beneficiaries' priorities. The feedback process can be empowering in itself, and acting on the feedback can significantly improve project impact and sustainability. While measuring performance against plans encourages supply-led and agency-centred development, using feedback systems can encourage demand-led and people-centred development. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4090&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4090&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT OECD How is evaluation managed and resourced in development agencies? What are the major trends and challenges in development evaluation? This report reviews evaluation in 23 bilateral aid donors and 7 multilateral development banks. It finds that significant progress has been made towards creating credible, independent evaluation processes. Challenges include the need to improve collaboration with other donors and country partners and to support the use of findings and take-up of recommendations. The use of evaluations needs to be systematised, for instance, by integrating the consultation of relevant reports into the planning process for new programmes or country strategies. Lessons from evaluations need to be better formulated and targeted to specific audiences in accessible and useable ways. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4088&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4088&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT John W. Bruce et al. What does Legal Empowerment of the Poor (LEP) mean? How can it be achieved and assessed? This paper outlines LEP's components – the enhancement, awareness, enablement and enforcement of rights. Synergies could be realised if projects pursued components simultaneously. It is difficult to address legal empowerment issues at the appropriate level: an intervention might fail because it is too superficial, or because it is too ambitious and is blocked by vested interests. However, some LEP interventions can be combined in ways that avoid losing important but risky opportunities. Indicators for assessing LEP could be divided into those which reflect efforts to deliver LEP, and those which measure its realisation. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4064&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4064&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Mon, 01 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMT Henry Lucas and Richard Longhurst This article discusses theoretical approaches to evaluation and draws on experiences from agriculture and health. It notes that different stakeholders may have varying expectations of an evaluation and that alternative approaches to evaluation are more suited to meeting some objectives than others. Randomised controlled trials, or well-designed quasi-experimental studies, probably provide the most persuasive evidence of the impact of a specific intervention but if the primary aim is systematic learning a Theories of Change or Realistic Evaluation approach may be of greater value. If resources permit, different approaches could be combined to cover both accountability and learning objectives. As there will be trade-offs between objectives, transparency and realistic expectations are essential in evaluation design. http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4040&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display&type=Document&id=4040&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=gsdrc&utm_source=newsfeed Monitoring and evaluation Fri, 01 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT