Evaluation under pressure: maintaining the quality of evidence and strengthening its use in decision-making
In my experience of managing development projects, particularly within the Canadian organisation where I currently work, monitoring and evaluation plays a key role in assessing results, ensuring accountability to partners and guiding decision-making. Working with monitoring forms, data collection questionnaires and outcome measurement tools has shown me that the availability of data does not necessarily guarantee its effective use.
Budgetary constraints can limit field visits, interviews with beneficiaries and post-intervention follow-up. They sometimes lead organisations to prioritise the production of reports within the set deadlines at the expense of an in-depth analysis of the changes observed.
In the face of these constraints, we can adapt our practices by simplifying data collection tools without sacrificing key indicators, standardising forms and making use of data that is already available. The use of remote interviews is also an option where the context (a good internet connection) allows it. However, my experience of data processing reminds me of the importance of checking data consistency and taking into account the limitations of the methods used. In capacity-building initiatives, for example, the immediate results of a training course are not sufficient to demonstrate that the skills acquired are actually being applied. A follow-up at a later stage – within the next 6 to 9 months – enables us to better assess how well the skills have been taken on board and their contribution to the expected changes.
In my view, budgetary constraints require, above all, better prioritisation of information needs and the integration of lessons learnt into day-to-day project management. We must also preserve the independence of evaluation and share lessons learnt with stakeholders. Even under budgetary pressure, evaluation must be regarded as a strategic investment that helps to improve interventions, rather than as a secondary expense.
RE: Evaluation under pressure : Strengthening evidence use, accountability and learning amidst funding constraints (Joint EvalforEarth-ALNAP discussion)
Côte d'Ivoire
Atta B. Jacob KOBENAN (PhD)
Anthropologue, Chargé de programme
Catalyste+
Posted on 19/10/2026
Evaluation under pressure: maintaining the quality of evidence and strengthening its use in decision-making
In my experience of managing development projects, particularly within the Canadian organisation where I currently work, monitoring and evaluation plays a key role in assessing results, ensuring accountability to partners and guiding decision-making. Working with monitoring forms, data collection questionnaires and outcome measurement tools has shown me that the availability of data does not necessarily guarantee its effective use.
Budgetary constraints can limit field visits, interviews with beneficiaries and post-intervention follow-up. They sometimes lead organisations to prioritise the production of reports within the set deadlines at the expense of an in-depth analysis of the changes observed.
In the face of these constraints, we can adapt our practices by simplifying data collection tools without sacrificing key indicators, standardising forms and making use of data that is already available. The use of remote interviews is also an option where the context (a good internet connection) allows it. However, my experience of data processing reminds me of the importance of checking data consistency and taking into account the limitations of the methods used. In capacity-building initiatives, for example, the immediate results of a training course are not sufficient to demonstrate that the skills acquired are actually being applied. A follow-up at a later stage – within the next 6 to 9 months – enables us to better assess how well the skills have been taken on board and their contribution to the expected changes.
In my view, budgetary constraints require, above all, better prioritisation of information needs and the integration of lessons learnt into day-to-day project management. We must also preserve the independence of evaluation and share lessons learnt with stakeholders. Even under budgetary pressure, evaluation must be regarded as a strategic investment that helps to improve interventions, rather than as a secondary expense.