Skip to main content

RE: Evaluation under pressure : Strengthening evidence use, accountability and learning amidst funding constraints (Joint EvalforEarth-ALNAP discussion)

Dr. Uzodinma Akujekwe Adirieje

Nigeria

Dr. Uzodinma Akujekwe Adirieje

CEO

Afrihealth Optonet Association (AHOA) - CSOs Network

Posted on 22/10/2026

ADAPTING EVALUATION UNDER FUNDING PRESSURE: ‘AHOA’s EXPERIENCE/PERSPECTIVE

Under funding pressure, AHOA treats evaluation as a routine management function, building accountability into delivery rather than adding it afterwards. Two projects led by Dr. Adirieje show how.

WHAT HAS WORKED 

In the UNDEF-funded Sustainable Citizen Participation (SCP) Project (2017-18), AHOA worked across nine Niger Delta states and 81 LGAs, delivering through local sub-implementing partners such as ACERD in Delta State. Citizens and CSO leaders were trained to generate and use local evidence, and advocacy visits reached state governors. Press coverage recorded government engagement, including Delta State's partnership with AHOA and Abia State's pledge of support for the training. This created a public accountability record at almost no extra cost.

In the Global Fund-supported Nigeria Malaria Matchbox assessment (2020), Dr. Adirieje served as a national consultant, with AHOA network members supporting fieldwork in Adamawa, Gombe, Taraba and Yobe. Locally recruited interviewers working in local languages reached 809 respondents, over 60% women, in four weeks. Findings were validated at a stakeholder workshop before action planning.

WHAT HAS NOT WORKED

Time and resources prevented transcribing every focus group, and KoboCollect handled extended qualitative data poorly, so teams returned to recordings and notes. Participation also suffered where respondents expected compensation was not provided within the Project architecture

BALANCING TRADE-OFFS 

Cost was contained through local capacity, not by dropping rigour: consent, triangulation and validation were retained. It is my considered view to keep routine learning cheap and internal, reserve independent evaluation for high-stakes questions, and report limitations openly.