Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

OECD 1999
Checklist of questions (cont.)
Country Programme Evaluation: A State of the Art Review
Is the evaluation to examine influence of agency-wide/donor HQ policies and systems
on CP performance?
– If yes, allocate time for interviews and document analysis in donor country.
Possibilities for productive joint (two or more) donor CPE?
– What are the potential costs and benefits in a joint evaluation? (Advantages: comparators, cost
savings, better able to comment on government without fear of punitive reaction, build basis for
improved donor co-ordination. Disadvantages/obstacles: different ideas about scope, focus or
cost; reluctance to accept criticism; fundamental differences in development philosophy)
– Which donor(s) would be suitable partners? (similar country programme, similar development
aims, established evaluation capacity, willing to give and take honest criticism, agree on cost
and process of evaluation)
Possibilities for productive partnership (government-donor) CPE?
– What are the potential costs and benefits in a joint donor-partner evaluation? (Advantages:
comparators, build basis for improved aid co-ordination/government ownership of
recommendations. Disadvantages/obstacles: different ideas about scope, focus or cost;
reluctance to accept criticism; fundamental differences in development philosophy)
Disclosure. The final report is presumably to be supplied to the CP and donor HQ. Is it also:
– Supplied to partner government? If, so, how?
– Supplied to country programmes (of same donor) in other countries for ‘‘lessons learned’’?
– Supplied to other donors in the same country? How? (e.g. as briefing document at CG meetings,
through sectoral meetings, etc.)
– Supplied to partner organisations (NGOs, etc.)?
– Supplied to country-level development community generally (e.g. placed in NGO apex body
libraries, universities and development institutions, etc.)?
– Published in donor country for parliamentary/public debate?
– Made available globally (e.g. abstract entered on DAC evaluation inventory website)?
Who/how many people from different stakeholder/researcher groups are to be involved in
– From donor HQ
– From other country programmes (perhaps the
M and E unit) of the donor (peer evaluation)
– From country programme HQ
– From project staff
– From partner organisations (e.g. implementing
NGOs)
– From other donors operating in that country
– From Northern academic
institutions/consultancies
– From partner government-Ministry of Finance,
aid co-ordinating agencies, M and E/audit units
– From partner government-partner line ministries
and agencies
– From partner country academic/consultancy
institutions
– From academic/consultancy institutions
in neighbouring Southern countries
A: Writing ToR B: Research C: Steering committee
103