Download PDF - ReliefWeb

More documents

Recommendations

Info

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies INGO International Non-governmental Organisation JEEAR Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KLA Kosovo Liberation Army LRRD Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development M & E Monitoring and Evaluation MSF Medecins sans Frontieres MSF-B Medecins sans Frontieres - Belgium MSF-H Medecins sans Frontieres - Holland NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation NGO Non-governmental Organisation ODI Overseas Development Institute O & M Operations and Management OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OFDA Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID) OSCE Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe PIA People In Aid SCHR Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response SCF Save the Children Fund SDC Swiss Development Cooperation SIDA Swedish International Development Agency TOR Terms of reference UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNHCHR United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights UNHCR United Nations High Commission for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance UNTAET United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor USAID United States Agency for International Development VOICE Voluntary Organisations in Cooperation in Emergencies
WFP World Food Programme (UN) WHO World Health Organisation (UN)
Page 1 and 2:
ALNAP Annual Review Series 2001 Hum
Page 3 and 4:
Foreword In April 2000 the full mem
Page 5 and 6:
THE EVALUATIVE REPORTS DATABASE (ER
Page 7 and 8:
1.1.1 Chapter 1: Setting the scene
Page 9 and 10:
US$ Millions 5000 4000 3000 2000 10
Page 11 and 12:
Box 1.1 Principal Accountability In
Page 13 and 14:
Box 1.2 The Development of Evaluati
Page 15 and 16:
Box 1.3 The Evaluative Reports Data
Page 17 and 18:
The principal contextual difference
Page 19 and 20:
inactions). However, the presence o
Page 21 and 22:
The first two and their sub-heading
Page 23 and 24:
About half of the evaluation report
Page 25 and 26:
Box 2.1 Successful Impact? ‘Despi
Page 27 and 28:
tarian assistance and political act
Page 29 and 30:
here. One important area is the pot
Page 31 and 32:
and coordination. Evaluation report
Page 33 and 34:
Other examples of longer term strat
Page 35 and 36:
development bureaucracies. Such pro
Page 37 and 38:
humanitarian space hampered agencie
Page 39 and 40:
Box 2.6 Flood Preparedness in China
Page 41 and 42:
• Improved coordination, includin
Page 43 and 44:
Box 2.7 Good Practice: Participatio
Page 45 and 46:
Almost none of the reports note how
Page 47 and 48:
Almost all reports are based on the
Page 49 and 50:
geo-political context, relations wi
Page 51 and 52:
CHAPTER 3 EVALUATIONS OF HUMANITARI
Page 53 and 54:
humanitarian issues, is highly sele
Page 55 and 56:
3.2 The Kosovo Conflict: a Set of I
Page 57 and 58: mandate. For instance: ‘One reaso
Page 59 and 60: although higher marks for effort an
Page 61 and 62: 3.2.12 A crisis in assistance: assi
Page 63 and 64: 3.3 Agency Response Issues 3.3.1 In
Page 65 and 66: The non-camped refugee population A
Page 67 and 68: or slower emergency were followed (
Page 69 and 70: eports), little provision is made e
Page 71 and 72: While the need to focus seriously o
Page 73 and 74: Codes of conduct and operating prin
Page 75 and 76: 3.4 Meta-evaluation: Kosovo Evaluat
Page 77 and 78: However, little more than introduct
Page 79 and 80: The final, M-4 layer, ought to guid
Page 81 and 82: ights-based approach to relief migh
Page 83 and 84: commissioning, designing and doing
Page 85 and 86: ‘While donor governments gave US$
Page 87 and 88: accorded more careful consideration
Page 89 and 90: 4.2.6 Linking relief, rehabilitatio
Page 91 and 92: ECHO evaluation (ECHO, 2000o) UNHCR
Page 93 and 94: For the most part there is an accep
Page 95 and 96: Kosovo and non-Kosovo reports were
Page 97 and 98: agencies should ensure that suffici
Page 99 and 100: a distinction between assessing whe
Page 101 and 102: However, the OECD-DAC (1999) guidan
Page 103 and 104: 4.6 Concluding Remarks This Annual
Page 105 and 106: Chapter 2 1. Use has also been made
Page 107: ACT ANNEX 2 ACRONYMS Action by Chur
Page 111 and 112: Impartiality An approach to the pro
Page 113 and 114: DANIDA (1999e) Evaluation of Danish
Page 115 and 116: Focus: Rehabilitation, resettlement
Page 117 and 118: Objective: Review whether project m
Page 119 and 120: Comments: Covers Montenegro, Serbia
Page 121 and 122: Objective: Assess the impact of act
Page 123 and 124: ANNEX 5 REFERENCES FOR OTHER SOURCE
Page 125 and 126: Le Billon, P. (2000) The Political
Page 127: Valid International (1999) Disaster
show all

Download PDF - ReliefWeb

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?