Thank you all for your participation. There’s been a lot of discussion on the pros and cons of EAs, with strong perspectives on either side of the debate. We have varied experiences with EAs as a group, some of us having implemented EAs, some of us not; and some of us having read reports, some of us not. And we have strong perspectives ranging from seeing them as an unnecessary use of scarce M&E resources to identifying specific benefits for their use in planning and maximizing the outcome of an evaluation.
We will wrap up this discussion by September 10th. Before then, I’d like to invite more reflection on when to implement an EA and when not to - the question of both cost-benefit and perceived benefit to stakeholders, relating to questions 1 and 2 above. I would suggest that EAs need to be proportionate to the cost of a subsequent evaluation, both as good use of financial resources and for stakeholder buy-in. Does anyone have any thoughts to contribute on this, both in terms of actual ratios, and/or addressing organizational policy on EAs on when and how they should be implemented? I know of some UN agencies that have developed an approach of making EAs mandatory for programs with large budgets over a specified amount. It seems to me that in addition to a checklist for implementing an EA, which provides important concepts to think about and address, a checklist for whether to implement an EA could also be useful in providing what to consider in deciding whether one is applicable and/or feasible.
RE: Evaluability Assessments: An invitation to reflect and discuss
United States of America
Amy Jersild
PhD Candidate and evaluation consultant
Western Michigan University
Posted on 03/09/2024
Thank you all for your participation. There’s been a lot of discussion on the pros and cons of EAs, with strong perspectives on either side of the debate. We have varied experiences with EAs as a group, some of us having implemented EAs, some of us not; and some of us having read reports, some of us not. And we have strong perspectives ranging from seeing them as an unnecessary use of scarce M&E resources to identifying specific benefits for their use in planning and maximizing the outcome of an evaluation.
We will wrap up this discussion by September 10th. Before then, I’d like to invite more reflection on when to implement an EA and when not to - the question of both cost-benefit and perceived benefit to stakeholders, relating to questions 1 and 2 above. I would suggest that EAs need to be proportionate to the cost of a subsequent evaluation, both as good use of financial resources and for stakeholder buy-in. Does anyone have any thoughts to contribute on this, both in terms of actual ratios, and/or addressing organizational policy on EAs on when and how they should be implemented? I know of some UN agencies that have developed an approach of making EAs mandatory for programs with large budgets over a specified amount. It seems to me that in addition to a checklist for implementing an EA, which provides important concepts to think about and address, a checklist for whether to implement an EA could also be useful in providing what to consider in deciding whether one is applicable and/or feasible.
Kind regards, Amy