Mid-term Review of the Diakonia Strategic Peace Building ... - Sida

2
2 M E T H O D O L O G Y
The relevance criterion is meant to assess the extent to which the outcomes/objectives
of a project or a programme are valid and adequate, whether in their initial form or
after they have been adjusted. The relevance criterion allows answering the following
question: Does Diakonia (and, where relevant, it’s implementing partners) do the
right thing? Doing the right thing or being relevant implies two things: 2
To what extent are the strategy and the programme/project of Diakonia appropriate
in relation to the needs and priorities of the target groups?
To what extent are the strategy and the programme/project of Diakonia appropriate
in relation to the objectives of Swedish development cooperation in
Zimbabwe?
The relevance criterion is also meant to focus on the consistency of the logic of a given
intervention. Assessing relevance means, thus, to evaluate the extent to which the
activities and outputs of the programme are consistent with the attainment of its objectives.
Finally, and beyond the two dimensions mentioned above, the relevance criterion also
relates to the responsiveness of organisations. Does Diakonia take into account
changes in the environment in which the organisation intervenes? The following two
questions have guided our thoughts in that matter:
To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid?
If any, are the new activities and outputs of the programme consistent with the
intended effects?
In order to be as objective and transparent as possible, a two-step qualitative rating
system was applied to the assessment questions. The evaluator has used the same
method as the one used for the evaluation of September 2011. This allows for a comparative
analysis of progress made by Diakonia and its partners.
First step: The evaluators provide a grade for each question (Cf. Box 1) and comments
explaining/justifying the reason for the grade.
Box 1: The grading system:
D: not performed by Diakonia because it is not in the organisation’s mandate
C: not done by Diakonia, although it could/should have been
B: Diakonia attempts to do it, but there is room for improvement
A: Diakonia does it well
Second step: Synthesise findings for each chapter.
2 Cf. Sida at Work
13