I am excited to have been part of the team for the Evaluability Assessment of the four Regional Integrated Initiatives of CGIAR. It was a valuable learning experience, revealing both strengths and challenges in using the EA framework for the first time, particularly in understanding evaluability and stakeholder engagement.
Many thanks, Hadera, for your posting. I appreciate you bringing up this important issue. I agree, Project Cycle Management (PCM) practices are essential, but they do not make standalone EAs redundant. EAs complement PCM by providing a dedicated, independent, and detailed assessment of a project's evaluability, thus enhancing overall project quality, accountability, and likelihood of success.
Indeed, EAs involve external evaluators who provide an impartial perspective. This independent assessment can identify potential issues that internal stakeholders might overlook due to familiarity or their interests in the project’s success.
Furthermore, standalone EAs specifically assess whether a project is ready to be evaluated. This includes reviewing the clarity and measurability of objectives, the robustness of data collection plans, the availability of baseline data, etc. These elements might not be thoroughly analyzed during regular PCM phases.
Finally, based on our experience with previous evaluations, an important issue is the quality of data. In fact, it has often been necessary to conduct extensive data cleaning, which required additional time and resources. This could be anticipated and prevented through an evaluability assessment.
RE: Evaluability Assessments: An invitation to reflect and discuss
Italy
Gaia Gullotta
Evaluation consultant
CGIAR
Posted on 08/08/2024
Dear All,
I am excited to have been part of the team for the Evaluability Assessment of the four Regional Integrated Initiatives of CGIAR. It was a valuable learning experience, revealing both strengths and challenges in using the EA framework for the first time, particularly in understanding evaluability and stakeholder engagement.
Many thanks, Hadera, for your posting. I appreciate you bringing up this important issue. I agree, Project Cycle Management (PCM) practices are essential, but they do not make standalone EAs redundant. EAs complement PCM by providing a dedicated, independent, and detailed assessment of a project's evaluability, thus enhancing overall project quality, accountability, and likelihood of success.
Indeed, EAs involve external evaluators who provide an impartial perspective. This independent assessment can identify potential issues that internal stakeholders might overlook due to familiarity or their interests in the project’s success.
Furthermore, standalone EAs specifically assess whether a project is ready to be evaluated. This includes reviewing the clarity and measurability of objectives, the robustness of data collection plans, the availability of baseline data, etc. These elements might not be thoroughly analyzed during regular PCM phases.
Finally, based on our experience with previous evaluations, an important issue is the quality of data. In fact, it has often been necessary to conduct extensive data cleaning, which required additional time and resources. This could be anticipated and prevented through an evaluability assessment.
With thanks and warm regards,
Gaia Gullotta