Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

Evaluating Country Programmes
220
headquarters, co-ordination offices and local partners can be found in the Asia I
Division (Bangladesh, Pakistan, India). The distinctive feature of the country programme
Bangladesh (1995-2002) is the linkage between self-evaluation, external
evaluation and different workshops (including a “vision” workshop and planning
workshops). 6 The pattern of linkage of evaluation and planning workshops is now
common practice within SDC. Evaluation and planning can even merge together in
the same exercise. In these cases, the first part of the workshop is dedicated to the
(self-) evaluation, and the second to its planning. In the overall picture, a strong tendency
towards participation is found in SDC and there is an ongoing transition from
an internal elaboration towards a partnership approach.
Process and methodology for country programme evaluation and planning
The SDC Controlling Units stress the responsibility of the operational line for
all planning, monitoring and evaluation measures (PEMT-cycle). For this reason, a
high degree of self-determination to induce external or self-evaluation can be
observed. According to this lived self-determination by the operational lines, four
different types of country programme evaluation7 currently used within SDC can be
identified:
– Pure self-evaluation.
– Self-evaluation accompanied by a consultant/staff from the Controlling Units.
– External evaluation (looking at the whole or, alternatively, only specific
aspects or sectors).
– The combination of self-evaluation and external evaluation (e.g. Bangladesh,
Tanzania, Nepal).
The goals of the process influence whether the preference is given to selfevaluation
or to external evaluation (i.e. whether a self-assessment or an external
view is sought). The SDC has developed recommendations on procedures and
methodologies for self-evaluations as well as for external evaluations. The first main
recommendation is intended to link both types of evaluation. The second refers to
the introduction of self-evaluation processes in projects, programmes and the SDC
administration. Even if in the PEMT philosophy, external evaluations are considered
as a good field for learning and prospect development, they are usually seen
as more appropriate for accountability purposes. The linkage of both evaluation
types is seen as the most effective means to ensure learning, and intends to strike
a balance between learning and accountability.
The participants of the internal SDC workshops judged external evaluation as
preferable and necessary when a change of direction of the programme is intended,
or a programme has just been opened. Preference should be given to selfevaluation
assuming the continuity of the programme and its commitment. Some
OECD 1999