maximising the use of evaluation reports
DESCRIPTION
Maximising the Use of Evaluation Reports. HIV Joint Evaluation Workshop, Limbé, March 15 – 19 2010. Thomas Alveteg. Content. Introduction – the need to improve the use of evaluation reports Proposal: System for response to evaluations Group discussion Summing up. External evaluations:. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
Thomas Alveteg
HIV Joint Evaluation Workshop, Limbé, March 15 – 19 2010
Content
Introduction – the need to improve the use of evaluation reports
Proposal: System for response to evaluationsGroup discussionSumming up
2
External evaluations:
Has become a regular feature of the Good Samaritan
Has become a part of the learning process - to continuously improve the programme
Presentation of external evaluations of country programmes at the annual JEW workshops – sharing of lessons learned
3
The project cycle
4
Project design
Application forfunding
Implementation
EvaluationRecommendations, lessons learned
Follow up
The follow up process of the mid-term evaluation in Cote d’Ivoire – some reflectionsBSCI - meeting to review recommendations and propose
line of actions, changes to the on-going programmeFiBS – response comments to the proposed line of actions
Un clear roles of the parties involved, including the HIV Service, in the process to follow up on the recommendations of the evaluation
5
The evaluation process
Source: Evaluation Guidelines, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland (2007). 6
Preparation of the evaluation
Use of evaluation results FeedbackImplementation
Today's focus:
Source: Evaluation Guidelines, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland (2007). 7
Preparation of the evaluation
Implementation
• (Reporting, dissemination)• Management Response – action plan
Follow up on the Management Response
Use ofevaluationresults
Feedback
Why management response?
8
Why management response?
To ensure that we are using the money spent on evaluations in an efficient way
To ensure that we make good use of the evaluation and the evaluation team’s expertise
Evaluation - part of the learning process, the institutional memory
9
Why management response?
A review of previous evaluations show that some key recommendations are not followed up properly
10
Why management response?
Time for analysis and reflection prior to take actions on the recommendations made by the evaluation
To decide on priorities in terms of implementation of the recommendations...convert into actions...
...and to decide on which recommendations that will not be implemented.
11
Need to define roles and responsibilities..
12
ImplementingBible Society
Grant givingBible Society
UBS HIV
Service
External donors
..for the follow up of external evaluations?
?
?
13
Proposal for a Management Response System
14
The Management Response document – content:
1. Comment on the relevance of the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation
2. State what recommendations that will not be considered and the reason for this
3. Outline actions to be taken to implement the recommendations - to improve future GS programmes – time specific and organisation responsible
15Source: Partly based on ‘Evaluation Guidelines, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland ‘(2007).
Identify 3 levels of recommendations “to be converted into an action plan”:
a) The national programme context
b) Methodological development of the GS programme
c) Fundraising related issues and related to strategic support to HIV Service
16Source: Partly based on ‘Evaluation Guidelines, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland ‘(2007).
Division of roles and responsibilities..
17
ImplementingBible Society
Grant givingBible Society
UBS HIV
Service
External donors
..for the follow up of external evaluations
Continued implementationof the country programme
Development of the GS,Methods & strategies
Issues concerning relation to donors,Strategic support to HIV Service
The Management Response Process (1)
18
ManagementResponseDocument
Evaluationreport
ImplementingBible Society
HIVService
Grant givingBible Society
Comments on evaluation,Draft management response
Joint reviewmeeting
Jointly agreed Management Response, including action plan
Evaluationrecommendations
In connection to theannual JEW workshop or separately
The Management Response Process (2)
19
Implementation of the recommendations according to the action plan
Joint follow upmeeting
Follow up on the action planafter 6 months / 1 year
Implementationof the action plan
ManagementResponseDocument
Summary of the proposal:
1. A Joint Management Response Process- to ensure that the evaluation recommendations are analyzed, translated into actions and that the implementation of the recommendations is monitored
2. A Joint Management Response Document – which includes an action plan for the implementation of the recommendations
3. Clear roles and responsibilities -for the follow up (implementing BS, grant giving BS and the HIV Service)
20
21
Group work to discuss the proposal - questions:
1. What did you like in the proposal?
2. Do you think that this proposal can improve how we work with the evaluation tool in the Good Samaritan?
3. Do you have any improvements to suggest to the proposal?
22
23