EVALUATION

1. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND
QUESTIONS
1.1 EVALUATION PURPOSE
The midterm performance evaluation (MPE) of USAID/Philippines’ Ecosystems Improved
for Sustainable Fisheries (ECOFISH) Project made use of the results chain describing the
Theory of Change (TOC) for the project’s key strategies, as discussed below, to address three
key evaluation objectives based on the Statement of Work (SOW) presented in Annex I:
1. To assess the evaluability of the 12 evaluation questions relating to final outcomes of the
project by determining if these are empirically feasible and practically oriented;
2. To document progress of implementation progress in terms of achieving its key results, and
analyze the factors and conditions that enhance or diminish achievement of these results;
and,
3. To analyze the main challenges in implementing the relevant strategies, and the extent to
which the project was able to address these challenges.
Following USAID’s Evaluation Policy, the MPE also aimed to provide evidences and measures of
achievements and challenges that the project stakeholders (i.e., USAID, Philippine government
partners, Tetra Tech ARD as the contractor, and other implementing partners of the project,
including civil society organizations [CSOs], academe and the private sector) could learn to
improve effectiveness and achieve key objectives and targets of the project during the remaining
two years of implementation.
In July 2015, USAID/Philippines contracted the conduct of this MPE to Sustainable Development
Solutions (SDS), a Philippine development consulting firm, which assembled a team of experts 1
(referred here as the MPE team) for this engagement.
1.2 EVALUATION QUESTIONS
The TOC-based results chain for the project with the key strategies specified the 12 evaluation
questions that were assessed during this MPE:
1. To what extent and under what conditions did an increased fish provision lead to better
employment for fishing among households?
2. To what extent and under what conditions did a reduction in pressures lead to increases in
1 SDS Mid-Term Performance Evaluation Team was composed of the Team Leader (Dr. Cleto L. Nañola, Jr.), Marine
Biologist (Dr. Hilly Ann R. Quiaoit), Institutional Development Specialist (Ms. Milagros H. Tetangco), Economist (Mr.
Virgilio E. Cabezon) and Statistician (Dr. Imelda G. Pagtolun-an). SDS President and Project Director (Mr. Renato S.
Relampagos) and SDS Study Coordinator (Mr. Raymundo C. Lasam) provided overall guidance and administrative support,
respectively. SDS in-house consultant (Luis P. Eleazar) assisted in the packaging and finalization of the Final Report. Nancy
Villanueva-Ebuenga served as Contracting Officer’s Representative from USAID/Philippines
7