In my view, it should be more strategic, more locally led, participatory and a lot more useful.
I used to think rigour meant big frameworks and 90-page reports. Then, in community dialogues on a community-based climate adaptation and nature-based solutions project in Chiredzi and Bikita, Zimbabwe, I watched high-volume reports gather dust, while a one-page visual summary shared under a tree shifted climate adaptation decisions that same week.
Here is what I would do again. Start by agreeing on the decision the evaluation needs to inform, not the framework. On our climate adaptation work, we asked: “What does the farmer, extension officer, or district team need to decide before the next planting season?” Then we used what already existed, like extension officer reports and rainfall records, before collecting anything new. Often, half the answer is already there. Donors can help too. If partners in one district pool funds, we get one joint evaluation instead of three overlapping ones.
Adopt participatory approaches and keep expertise local. People who live in a place understand the language, the seasons and the politics, and no international consultant can fly that in. Evaluators should work closely with them from day one, shaping the questions, collecting and sorting the data, and making sense of the findings together. Pair that with simple tools like ODK or Kobo on a phone, and it’s cheaper and faster. Most importantly, communities trust the results more because they helped build them.
And don’t wait for the final report. We took our draft findings to community meetings and let farmers challenge them. Their feedback made the evidence better, and the decisions followed.
Cutting evaluation might look like a saving, but it costs us. We keep funding programmes that do not work, we lose the voices of people who are already overlooked, and we repeat mistakes because the learning disappears. In tight times, evaluation is how we make sure scarce resources reach the people who need them most.
RE: Evaluation under pressure : Strengthening evidence use, accountability and learning amidst funding constraints (Joint EvalforEarth-ALNAP discussion)
Zimbabwe
Wilbert Marimira
Evaluator
Tsorodzo dzeAfrika Advisory
Publicado el 04/11/2026
In my view, it should be more strategic, more locally led, participatory and a lot more useful.
I used to think rigour meant big frameworks and 90-page reports. Then, in community dialogues on a community-based climate adaptation and nature-based solutions project in Chiredzi and Bikita, Zimbabwe, I watched high-volume reports gather dust, while a one-page visual summary shared under a tree shifted climate adaptation decisions that same week.
Here is what I would do again. Start by agreeing on the decision the evaluation needs to inform, not the framework. On our climate adaptation work, we asked: “What does the farmer, extension officer, or district team need to decide before the next planting season?” Then we used what already existed, like extension officer reports and rainfall records, before collecting anything new. Often, half the answer is already there. Donors can help too. If partners in one district pool funds, we get one joint evaluation instead of three overlapping ones.
Adopt participatory approaches and keep expertise local. People who live in a place understand the language, the seasons and the politics, and no international consultant can fly that in. Evaluators should work closely with them from day one, shaping the questions, collecting and sorting the data, and making sense of the findings together. Pair that with simple tools like ODK or Kobo on a phone, and it’s cheaper and faster. Most importantly, communities trust the results more because they helped build them.
And don’t wait for the final report. We took our draft findings to community meetings and let farmers challenge them. Their feedback made the evidence better, and the decisions followed.
Cutting evaluation might look like a saving, but it costs us. We keep funding programmes that do not work, we lose the voices of people who are already overlooked, and we repeat mistakes because the learning disappears. In tight times, evaluation is how we make sure scarce resources reach the people who need them most.