| Session Title: Improving Global Results: Getting the Most out of Evaluations of Global Partnership Programs - Through Intentional Planning, Policies, and Quality Standards |
| Multipaper Session 289 to be held in Room 107 in the Convention Center on Thursday, Nov 6, 10:55 AM to 12:25 PM |
| Sponsored by the Evaluation Use TIG and the International and Cross-cultural Evaluation TIG |
| Chair(s): |
| Uma Lele, Independent Consultant, umalele.orgemail |
| Abstract: The presentations and discussion will familiarize evaluators (and users of evaluations) with the challenges involved in evaluating Global and Regional Partnership Programs (GRPPs), and equip them with emerging consensus standards and guidelines for application to development programs. These standards and guidelines were developed by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) of the World Bank under the auspices of the OECD/DAC Evaluation Network, with input and validation from a wide range of stakeholders from both developed and developing countries. GRPPs are complex to evaluate because they (a) often involve provision of global public goods (GPGs); (b) are usually funded by multiple donors, requiring complex governance and collective decision-making processes; (c) evolve over time as the scale and specific strategies change with donor mix, resources, or a shifting external environment; and (d) have a global community clientele, making planning, quality, and transparency particularly important. |
| Intentional Evaluation Policy Development, Planning and Budgeting for Global and Regional Partnership Programs: Lessons Learned |
| Dale Hill, World Bank Group, dhill@worldbank.org |
| Intentional Planning for high-quality evaluations of Global and Regional Partnership Programs (GRPPs) should begin soon after inception ideally including the intention or requirement in the charter. A framework for such evaluations may also be defined in advance. Once the Governing Body is assembled, an evaluation policy should be established, which covers roles and responsibilities, principles on independence and participation, evaluator selection processes, transparency and disclosure, and processes for acting on findings. In its ongoing review of Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) processes for a sample of GRPPs, the independent Evaluation Group (IEG ) of the World Bank has found that such evidence of intentionality and sound planning are often lacking. This presentation will cover the ingredients of intentional planning for M&E that provide the foundation for subsequent high-quality evaluations, and help ensure their productive use, and will present the range of experience found and some examples of good practice. |
| Adapting Standard Evaluation Criteria to evaluation of Global and Regional Partnership Programs |
| Chris Gerrard, World Bank Group, cgerrard1@worldbank.org |
| Standard Evaluation Criteria can be applied to Global and Regional Partnership Programs, but several features pose complexities: (a) They often involve provision of global public goods; (b) They are usually funded by multiple donors, requiring complex governance and collective decision-making processes; (c) They evolve over time as the scale and specific strategies change with donor mix, resources, or a shifting external environment; and (d) They finance interdependent activities at different levels (global, country, local). This presentation will present some examples of analytical tools and sub-criteria which have been developed to apply to evaluation of these GRPPs. For example, a framework for assessing relevance will be presented which analyzes both the vertical relevance (subsidiarity issues) and horizontal relevance (alternative sources of supply). Also, sub-criteria for assessing effectiveness of governance, such as legitimacy, fairness, and accountability will be described. |
| Expanding Financial Services to the Poor in a Rapidly Changing Technological Environment: the Case of the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest (CGAP) |
| Khalid Siraj, Independent Consultant, ksiraj@cox.net |
| Building on the successful model of Bangladesh's Grameen Bank, the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest (CGAP) was founded by multiple donors in 1995, with the mandate to promote and support expansion of microfinance for the poor. The program has since been evaluated three times, and each time, management has acted on the findings and adjusted its strategy, clientele, and product mix to better serve its objectives. The program has recently received a large contribution from the Gates Foundation to explore new ways to make use of technology to improve effectiveness. This presentation will first review briefly the findings of the three evaluations and the follow-up actions taken. Then it will illustrate through reference to the most recent evaluation, how some of the recently agreed principles and guidelines for GRPP evaluation were applied. |
| Measuring and Aggregating Achievement of Global Environmental Benefits From Dispersed Small Grants: The Case of the Critical Ecosystems Partnership Fund |
| Lauren Kelly, World Bank Group, lkelly@worldbank.org |
| The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a global partnership housed in Conservation International (CI) between CI, the World Bank, the Global Environment Facility, the MacArthur Foundation, the Government of Japan, and the French Development Agency that provides grants to NGOs and other private sector partners to protect critical ecosystems (ecological hotspots) in developing countries. During its first phase (December 2000 to June 2007), CEPF awarded approximately 1,000 grants to more than 600 NGOs, community groups, and private sector organizations in 33 countries. Averaging $16-17 million a year, CEPF grants have supported the expansion and enhanced management of protected areas, the promotion of alternative sustainable livelihoods in production landscapes, and environmental education, awareness and capacity building. This presentation will review the arrangements under which CEPF manages, administers, monitors and reports on the achievements of its small-grants program in an effort to understand how the evaluation of a global program must differ from the evaluation of a project administering small grants for the purpose of achieveing global environmental gains. Then it will illustrate through reference to the most recent evaluation, how some of the recently agreed principles and guidelines for GRPP evaluation were applied. |