Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

Evaluating Country Programmes
104
Checklist of questions (cont.)
What should be included in the country background section? In what depth?
– Economic structure/performance/prospects
– Poverty profile: percentages below poverty line(s), human development indicators
– Poverty analysis: poverty processes, coping strategies, characteristics of the poor/major groups
among the poor
– Partner country politics: history, degree of democracy/participation, nature of institutions, bases
for mobilisation (ethnicity, class, region…)
– Partner country policy: macro-economic, social, sectoral
– Partner country aid environment analysis: degree of aid dependency, volume and trends in total
aid, major actors, perceived comparative advantages
– Socio-cultural description/analyses: gender, class, community, ethnic relations
– Local project area description/needs analysis
Contents of background on donor country programme
Comparators-nothing will be ideal, but there should be an explicit requirement to compare
performance when possible
– Country programmes of other donors, same country
– Other country programmes, same donor, especially in same world region
– Comparable projects run by partner government/other donors/NGOs
Attribution, accounting for fungibility and constructing meaningful counter-factuals
– In most CPE situations no clear solution to these issues: but should be drawn to attention
of evaluators and considered in writing CPE
Sources of information
– Interviews, workshops, documentary file reviews
– Donor HQ staff-regional desk officers, sectoral advisors, etc.
– Donor CP senior staff
– Donor CP project staff
– Partner government-Ministry of Finance, aid co-ordinating agencies, M and E/audit units
– Partner government-partner line ministries and agencies
– Implementing partners (e.g. NGOs, contractors)
– Fieldwork/beneficiary consultations
Methodology: data collection and analysis
– Interviews
– Workshop discussions
– Structured workshop discussions: ranking, scoring, classification
– Project evaluation questionnaire: evaluators rank/score/classify projects and national CP
(explicit definition of ‘‘good’’, ‘‘average’’, ‘‘poor’’ needed) on basis of interviews/document
reviews/workshops
– Self-evaluation questionnaires: CP staff rank/score/classify performance of their projects and
national CP (good guidance on ‘‘good’’, ‘‘average’’, ‘‘poor’’ needed); list or prioritise problems
faced/strengths and weaknesses
– Client surveys: as above, but projects and CP evaluated by partner government officials
or implementing NGOs rather than donor staff
– Econometric analysis: attempt to construct a national economic model and assess
counterfactual, non-aid outcomes for comparison
– Fieldwork (project aid): surveys, R/PRA techniques to assess impact, obtain beneficiary
perspectives
Source: Authors.
OECD 1999