AfDB Evaluation Week 2018 Strengthening Development Impact

PROCEEDINGS OF THE EVENT

Acknowledgements

Task Manager: Magdaline Nkando, Consultant, Knowledge Management

Team Members: Jacqueline Nyagahima, Télesphore Somé, Dieter Gijsbrechts, Grace Gabala, Annita Claire Anon-Kouadio, Jean-Marc Anoh, Najade Lindsay, Aminata Kouma, Mireille Cobinah-Ebrottie

Organizing Committee: Jayne Musumba, Magdaline Nkando, Grace Gabala, Telesphore Some, Mireille Cobinah-Ebrottie, Najade Lindsay, Aminata Kouma, Mabarakissa Diomande, Joseph Mouanda, Samson Houetohossou, Mirianaud Oswald Agbadome, Girma Earo Kumbi, Daniel Alonso, Boubacar Ly

Other assistance/contributions provided by:

Aminata Kouma, Boubacar Ly, Brenda Tautsagae, Daniel Alonso, Eric Yai, Gilbert Adjimoti, Kobena Hanson, Latefa Camara, Mohamed Coulibaly, Najade Lindsay, Samson Houetohossou, Stephanie Yoboue, Telesphore Some (all Rapporteurs for the various sessions)

Special thanks to: Jayne Musumba, Monica Lomena-Gelis, Foday Turay, Madhusoodhanan Mampuzhasseril, Albert-Enéas Gakusi Kobena Hanson, Daniel Andoh, Felicia Avwontom, Victoria Chisala, Olagoke A. Oladapo, Zeneb Toure, Olivier Shingiro

Division Manager: Karen Rot-Münstermann

Evaluator-General Karen Rot-Münstermann (Acting)

1

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AfDB African Development Bank

AfREA African Evaluation Association

AGRA Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa

AHFR Agricultural Finance and Rural Development Department, AfDB

AHGC Gender, Women and Civil Society Department, AfDB

AHHD Human Capital, Youth and Skills Development Department, AfDB

APNODE African Parliamentarians' Network on Development Evaluation

ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa

CLEAR-AA Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results -Anglophone Africa

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

CSPs Country Strategy Papers

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

ICRR Implementation Completion and Results Report Review

IDEV Independent Development Evaluation

IEG Independent Evaluation Group

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

KPI Key Performance Indicator

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MASEN Moroccan Agency for Sustainable Energy

NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation

OECD-DAC Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - Development Assistance

Committee

PPPs Public-Private Partnerships

RDGC Central Africa Regional Development and Business Delivery Office, AfDB

RDGW West Africa Regional Development and Business Delivery Office, AfDB

RMCs Regional Member Countries

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

SNDI Senior Vice President’s Office and Senior Management Coordination Committee

Secretariat, AfDB

SNDR Delivery, Performance Management and Results Department, AfDB

TOC Theory of Change

ToRs Terms of Reference

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Education Fund

USAID United States Agency for International Development

VOPEs Voluntary Organizations for Professional Evaluation

2

Introduction African countries are implementing multiple agendas in their pursuit of socio-economic progress. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the African Union’s Agenda 2063, and the respective national and regional blueprints are expected to trigger the economic and social transformation of Africa. The ultimate goal is to promote inclusive growth and sustainable development. Agenda 2063 in particular aspires to a prosperous Africa based on inclusive growth and sustainable development, integrated, peaceful and secure, with good governance, democracy, respect for human rights, justice and the rule of law, and where the full potential of all people is realized, without fear, disease or want. In line with this agenda, African countries are prioritizing structural transformation in their national, regional and continental development programs to promote employment through agriculture and industrialization; to enable access to clean and affordable energy and water; to diversify sources of food; and to promote inclusive growth and equality for a better life for all Africans. To contribute to this transformation, the African Development Bank (AfDB) embarked on a new development strategy featuring five priority areas referred to as the High 5s, including Light Up and Power Africa; Feed Africa; Integrate Africa; Industrialize Africa; and Improve quality of life for the people of Africa. This ambitious African transformation agenda cannot be achieved without effective monitoring and evaluation at the national, regional and continental levels. Agenda 2063 aims to enhance impact on the ground by learning from the past through data-backed analysis of development projects as well as numerical targeting of output and outcome indicators. It advocates for a paradigm shift towards planning for results and calls upon African member States to domesticate its results framework into their national plans and systems to use as a basis for monitoring and evaluating their national plans. Developing sound methodologies, systems and processes for tracking impact and holding stakeholders accountable for results are only part of the story, however. Monitoring and evaluation are also important sources of evidence and learning, about what has worked, what has not, and why. These lessons, if properly taken into account and integrated into new policies, strategies, projects and processes, will help to improve the quality of design and implementation, and make interventions more effective, efficient and sustainable. This in turn will strengthen the development impact that Agenda 2063 seeks. The AfDB’s Independent Development Evaluation (IDEV) conducts evaluations and disseminates knowledge from them to inform the Bank’s decision-making processes at diverse levels in order to foster sustainable growth and poverty reduction in Africa. As part of its contribution to the efforts geared towards the achievement of Agenda 2063, IDEV organized a knowledge sharing forum, AfDB Development Evaluation Week 2018, under the theme “Strengthening Development Impact”. The forum was held at the AfDB’s headquarters in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire on 5-7 September 2018.

Aims and Objectives of the Evaluation Week 2018 This forum focused on the contribution that monitoring and evaluation can make to the achievement of greater development outcomes through learning from the past. The main objective was to facilitate a reflection on the contribution of development evaluation to the implementation of the key priority areas of the Agenda 2063. The specific objectives were:

To promote evaluation as a valuable tool for follow-up and review of the progress of implementation of Agenda 2063, and to inform future policies and programs for greater impact;

To facilitate sharing of knowledge and experiences on the evaluation methods and practices that help foster the achievement of development results; and

To enable interrogation of approaches to development evaluation that foster innovation, uptake of lessons, and broader learning.

Participants gather at the AfDB auditorium for the plenary sessions

3

Expected Outcomes Increased appreciation of evaluation as a critical means for effective follow up and review of

progress of the achievement of Agenda 2063.

Increased awareness of the role of evaluation in facilitating achievement of Africa’s transformation

agenda.

Greater understanding of the strategies that could help African States leverage on knowledge from implementation of priority programs to improve design and implementation of future development programs.

Increased awareness of the opportunities that exist for innovative and dynamic development of evaluation in Africa including strategic partnerships.

Overall, the Evaluation Week 2018 provided an opportunity for the participants to address fundamental questions including:

What is the role of evaluation in facilitating the achievement of Africa’s transformation agenda?

In what ways do evaluations contribute to the achievement of Agenda 2063 across sectors and

thematic areas?

How can evaluations help African States leverage on knowledge from implementation of priority

programs?

To achieve the objectives of the forum and gain insights into the highlighted fundamental questions, a number of activities were organized across the main theme including a Knowledge Café; a professional development workshop on the gender aspects of evaluation; a technical discussion on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee’s (OECD-DAC) evaluation criteria; and thematic panel discussions on Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs); agricultural value chains development; and the potential of partnerships for increasing demand for and supply of knowledge from evaluations. This proceedings report captures highlights from the three days of deliberations, including the key findings and takeaways from each of the sessions.

We congregated at the Knowledge Café to

brainstorm on a plan for better stakeholder

engagement during the evaluation process

We convened at a gender workshop to better

understand how to generate and use gender-

disaggregated indicators to measure impact

We assembled at the plenary sessions to take

stock of how much we are learning from

evaluations through PPPs, agricultural value

chains, and partnerships development

4

PRE-CONFERENCE SESSIONS Knowledge Café: Evaluations for Greater Impact in Bank Operations Overall Facilitator: Felicia Avwontom, Division Manager, Organization and Methods Division

(SNDI1), AfDB Opening Remarks: Foday Turay, Chief Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB Session Coordinator: Jayne Musumba, Principal Knowledge Management Officer, Independent

Development Evaluation, AfDB

Knowledge Mentors: Anglophone Tables

Victoria Chisala, Division Manager, Corporate Strategy and Policy Division (SNSP1), AfDB Olagoke A. Oladapo, Division Manager, Rural Infrastructure Development Division, (AHFR2), AfDB

Felicia Avwontom, Division Manager, Organization and Methods Division (SNDI1), AfDB Knowledge Mentors: Francophone Tables

Zeneb Toure, Division Manager, Civil Society and Community Engagement Division (AHGC2), AfDB Olivier Shingiro, Chief Delivery and Results Officer, Delivery, Performance Management and

Results Department (SNDR0), AfDB

Albert-Enéas Gakusi, Chief Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB

The first of the activities of the Evaluation Week 2018, the Knowledge Café, provided a platform for over 70 participants to deliberate on the strategies that could enable effective stakeholder engagement in conducting and utilizing evaluations. Co-hosted by IDEV, SNDI and SNDR, the overall aim of the Knowledge Café was to provide a better understanding of the role of different stakeholders in an independent evaluation process; the needs of the different stakeholders (as clients); and partnerships required for conducting evaluations and facilitating uptake of the evaluation findings and recommendations. To gain insights into a more meaningful understanding of evaluations stakeholders, the Knowledge Café sought answers to three principal questions:

1. How can evaluators improve their engagement with evaluation stakeholders? 2. How can stakeholders address the challenges associated with communication and use of

evaluation findings? 3. What are the opportunities and challenges in collaboration between the evaluation teams and

operations staff? Overall, the Knowledge Café was expected to deliver key outcomes including:

Increased value of evaluations through improved engagement of internal and external stakeholders;

Better management of the challenges of evaluation utilization by the Bank; and

Enhanced promotion of the contribution of evaluations in accelerating Africa’s transformation through the Bank’s High 5s priorities.

Strategic identification of evaluation stakeholders was recognized as a critical exercise and one of the good practices in an evaluation process because the various stakeholders act on the findings and recommendations as well as influence policy. The discussions revealed the multi-stakeholder nature of the evaluation process with the participants identifying several categories of evaluation stakeholders. Broadly, the Bank’s evaluation stakeholders were classified as IDEV evaluators; the Bank’s Board of Directors and Senior Management; the Bank’s Regional Member

Who are the evaluation stakeholders and what role

does each of them play in the evaluation process and

beyond?

Participants were divided into six table groups, three of which were assigned one question each in English and the other three similar questions in French. A Knowledge Mentor led each table

5

Countries (RMCs); input stakeholders who mainly provide evaluation tools to IDEV; various Bank departments who are part of the primary clients of IDEV; users who are the main consumers of IDEV reports; donors; implementers; and the various beneficiaries of the Bank’s projects. Specifically, IDEV evaluators are responsible for conducting the evaluations, while the Bank’s Board of Directors places requests for evaluations and use the evaluation results and recommendations to make decisions. The Bank’s Operations teams provide information to be used for evaluation and participate in the evaluation process. There are also technical and financial partners who share their expertise, sometimes as peer reviewers, provide information and validate the evaluation results.

The participants were unanimous that good relationships would increase demand for evaluations and use of knowledge from evaluations in Bank operations. They underscored the importance of evaluators to show concern for the interest of each of the evaluation stakeholders by, among other things, closely monitoring feedback from civil society organizations; conducting more impact evaluations;

and adopting a more user-friendly language in presenting its evaluation reports. Too technical language would compromise application of findings, lessons learned and recommendations from evaluations. Participants stressed need for a manual that describes what is actually on the ground as well as the need for inclusion of the projects’ beneficiaries in IDEV reports. Ownership and use of information from evaluations could be enhanced by training people on how to interpret evaluation results as well as early engagement of all stakeholders. The importance of an appropriate Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system was underscored as a tool to help in, among other things, defining stakeholders’ roles. Other success factors are objectivity in writing of the evaluation report; ensuring that the evaluation objectives are clearly understood by all stakeholders; timely sharing of evaluations results to enable timely corrective measures; early development of a communication strategy; strict honouring of commitments by every stakeholder; and distinguishing between evaluation and audit to regain actors' confidence. Considering that each evaluation serves a specific purpose, it is imperative that the key messages are well targeted to the specific characteristics and needs of the target audience to effectively fulfil the intended purpose. This discussion revolved around the “who”, the “what” and the “how” of the dissemination of information and knowledge from evaluations. It emerged that while most of the time we jump into the content of our messaging, what is to be communicated largely depends on the intended recipient. It is therefore imperative that before embarking on any evaluation, its intended recipients are well-identified. Apart from the target audience, the discussion revealed that context defines the content to be communicated.

Participants concurred that while all evaluations results need to be communicated regardless of the type of evaluation, contextual factors define the type of information needed by each category of stakeholders. Therefore, evaluators should systematically conduct stakeholder mapping, which should ultimately result in an information needs assessment for the various stakeholders involved in the implementation of policies, projects, or programmes in their respective fields. The target audience also varies according to the type of evaluation. For instance, a country evaluation will target a government whereas a sector evaluation will be directed to the actors of the respective sector.

What relationships need to be established to ensure that the stakeholders own and use the

information and knowledge from the evaluations in Bank

operations?

What needs to be communicated (findings,

conclusions, lessons, best practices, recommendations of

evaluations)?

Evaluation results should be adapted to the specific needs of the target stakeholders; must be relevant and action-oriented; and be classified by stakeholders’ categories for greater impact

6

Just like the type of evaluation messages, participants concurred that the choice of channel of communication is largely dependent on the needs and characteristics of the target audience. They were unanimous that the type and format of information as well as the channel for relaying that information to the Bank would be different from the one sent to the Bank’s beneficiaries. For instance, internal resources

such as the Bank's website, the IDEV website, social media, e-mails, internal review and workshops would be appropriate for reaching out to the Bank, while for beneficiaries in a given country (e.g. Côte d'Ivoire, where more than half of the population is illiterate), interactive channels such as video reports, interviews and films would be the preferred channels.

Challenges to Effective Collaboration

Continuous interaction: Establishing continuous interaction during the evaluation cycle is often elusive. For example, participation in evaluation reference groups by operations departments is often disappointing.

Perception of bias: The perception that evaluators may have their own views sometimes might hinder the evaluation process. On the other hand, stakeholders do not always understand the independence of the evaluation function, and they tend to want to influence what should be said or added in a given report.

Competences: The type of skills and competences required (both from the stakeholders and the evaluators) to ensure that effective collaboration happens is often not clear.

Timeliness: Often, evaluations are conducted long after the interventions are completed. While this allows a study of the longer-term impacts of the intervention, important insights from the stakeholders’ side might be missed due to turnover over the years. Sometimes, you may not find the people who were there at the inception of the project or even during the implementation phase.

Identification of collaborators: The importance of identifying who the collaborators are during an evaluation process and what we understand and expect this collaboration to be cannot be overemphasized. It is also crucial to determine what would be the role of each group of stakeholders during the evaluation process.

Opportunities for Effective Collaboration

Pre-evaluation briefing: Engaging stakeholders in a discussion before embarking on the evaluation process for them to understand the evaluation exercise and to ensure that everyone correctly understands the Terms of Reference (TORs).

Joint decision on the evaluation subject: There is an opportunity for collaboration at the stage of deciding what is being evaluated; how the evaluation will be conducted; as well as in identifying the role each group of stakeholders would play in the process. This engagement is important to break barriers and establish trust (with the Management and Operations teams) to demonstrate the usefulness of the evaluation exercise.

Endorsing evaluation as a learning process: Ensuring that evaluation is a priority for our Operations departments is important, and there is an opportunity to include knowledge and lessons learned from evaluation into Operations implementation requirements. More attention and legitimacy should be given to this learning process in Operations, by for example, including learning as a mandatory Key Performance Indicator (KPI) in performance assessments. Collaboration should be more about knowledge sharing as part of Operations. This would be facilitated by, among other things, developing a template illustrating how collaboration/engagement is expected to happen at different steps of the evaluation process.

Revamping sensitization and awareness: Evaluation offices should conduct more workshops and communications activities aimed at increasing understanding of the Operations staff and other stakeholders on what evaluation really entails. This would contribute to changing the institutional culture to mainstream evaluation across Operations. In this regard, Management’s buy-in is critical.

How should information and knowledge from evaluation be effectively communicated to

ensure it is timely and relevant for operations staff?

What are the opportunities and challenges of collaboration

between evaluation teams and the different stakeholders?

7

Professional Development Workshop: Gender and Evaluation as a Pathway to Development Moderator: Simon Mizrahi, Director, Delivery, Performance Management & Results Department, AfDB Opening Remarks: Karen Rot-Munstermann, Acting Evaluator General, AfDB

Presentation: Experience at IDEV in Integrating Gender in Evaluation: Progress, Challenges and Proposals for the Future

Monica Lomena-Gelis, Principal Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB

Presentation: Results from the “Gender Flag” Applied to Project Completion Reports Elena Bardasi, Senior Economist, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank Group

Gisela Garcia, Evaluation Officer, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank Group Discussants Sylvie Poloumbodje Bara, Socio-Economiste, PhD, Central Africa Regional Development and

Business Delivery Office (RDGC2), AfDB

Gisela Garcia, Evaluation Officer, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank

Apolo Peter Kyeyune, Principal Gender Monitoring and Evaluation Results Officer, Civil Society

and Social Innovation (AHGC1), AfDB

Maimouna Diop Ly, Health & Social Protection Officer, Human and Social Development Department (AHHD2), AfDB

Joseph Kouassi N’Guessan, Division Manager, Energy, Infrastructure and Financial Sector, Central Africa Regional Development and Business Delivery Office (RDGC.1), AfDB

Egidia Rukundo, Senior Gender Specialist, West Africa Regional Development and Business Delivery Office (RDGW2), AfDB

The main objective of the gender workshop was to enable a better understanding of the gender aspects of evaluation and to sensitize participants on the need to generate and use gender-disaggregated indicators to measure distributive impacts. The session included sharing of the experiences of the World Bank and the African Development Bank to provide a background to the discussion. The discussion revealed that gender was an integral part of the mandate of both the World Bank and the African Development Bank and participants called for more investment in women and girls. For the AfDB for instance, the Bank’s Gender Strategy aims to make progress in women’s access to economic opportunities, close the gender gap, and improve knowledge and capacity. The World Bank has made great strides including mobilizing management commitment and creating tools for evaluators including a Gender Flag that the Task Team Leaders use to indicate whether their lending or Technical Assistance activities systematically consider and address gender inequalities in the analysis, proposed actions and monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The Gender Flag is for example used by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) in appraising Implementation Completion and Results Report Review (ICRR) to validate evidence of inclusion of gender content. The discussion however revealed a number of challenges that need to be addressed to ensure maximum benefits from gender mainstreaming in evaluation processes. The discussion highlighted key challenges to integration of gender aspects in evaluation including, but not limited to, scarcity of right expertise at the right time to evaluate gender issues; lack of a structured approach to integrate gender into the design of evaluations; lack of dedicated budget for gender inclusion in evaluation; lack of a gender dimension in the project objectives, evaluation documents, and projects’ results

Simon Mizrahi emphasized the importance of working together in integrating gender in evaluations

8

chain; inadequate information on gender; lack of sustained commitment and financial resources for gender inclusion; and weak gender indicators that often focus only on the outputs and seldom on the outcome.

A number of suggestions on how to address the gender challenges were shared including development of guidelines and a structured approach for assessing gender issues; recruitment of gender specialists; and adopting a flexible approach that articulates the right questions to ask, the method to use, and the resources available to answer the questions. The discussion underscored the importance of having the right gender indicators and data and encouraged proactive internal discussions on the relevance of gender indicators, the evaluation approach to use, and partnerships with local experts. Participants observed that evaluators can only make recommendations on inclusion of gender aspects in projects and evaluation exercises, but cannot compel Task Managers or RMCs to implement them. Apolo Peter Kyeyune however argued that it was the Task Manager’s responsibility to consider all aspects, especially

when it comes to gender inclusion. It was agreed that gender considerations and inclusivity were everyone’s responsibility and participants underscored the importance of involving everyone in the process of mainstreaming gender in projects. This was echoed by Gisela Garcia who emphasized the need for unity in lobbying for gender inclusion in evaluation with the advice that “it is important to stick together; have conversations about what is happening; and intervene at the beginning, not only at the end”. Participants also advocated for a robust legal framework to enforce the use of a gender lens in project inception and design. They were however cautioned to lower their expectations as gender is not always accorded the attention required in projects especially in terms of budgetary allocation. Although the IEG has developed internal guidelines to address low attention to gender in evaluation, it was revealed that guidelines for partnership with countries in Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) were not binding in that they use “can” instead of “must”. It was suggested that they be reviewed and amended to use a language that instils a stronger sense of obligation. It was reported that IEG uses a flexible ad hoc approach with common characteristics such as the Theory of Change (TOC), the evaluation of gender role, gaps and changes in overtime work, the identification of activities and methodologies, and the presentation of results, to gauge the level of attention to gender aspects in projects, sector and thematic evaluations. From case studies on health and infrastructure evaluations, IDEV cited improper treatment of women in projects, especially in fragile contexts, as a major hurdle to gender mainstreaming in evaluation. A good understanding of the socio-anthropological factors as well as a participative approach were identified as some of the key remedies to this challenge. The discussion emphasized the importance of continuous evidence-based consultation and sensitization activities as well as integration of gender issues at the different stages of project feasibility study and evaluation. The AfDB has adopted a Gender Strategy, which was described as a significant asset, and would require recruitment of a gender specialist for project design, execution, and M&E for its successful implementation. As part of the strategy roll out, the Bank has developed a Gender Marker System to help in categorizing all operations based on their impact on women. This is in addition to deploying gender experts in the Bank’s regional hubs to support projects’ design and implementation; scaling up the production of toolkits and guidelines; integrating gender outcomes in the corporate results measurement framework; enhancing data collection; and fostering continuous policy dialogue on the gender aspects of Africa’s transformation.

The Gender Marker System The objective of the Gender Marker System is to mainstream gender in the objectives, components and results of the Bank’s Operations. It divides the projects into four main categories: Category 1: Projects that are primarily dedicated to gender enhancement (main objective, components, impacts, etc.). The main objective of these projects is to promote gender equality and women empowerment; Category 2: Projects with impacts on the promotion of gender and gender-sensitive performance indicators; Category 3: Projects with one of the outputs having an impact on gender; and Category 4: Projects with several activities that contribute to reduce gender inequalities and promote gender. The classification helps in forecasting and budgeting. It is critical to have a budget action plan on gender for categories 1-3, and this will make it easier to establish a plan for category 4.

A participant sharing her ideas

11

Discussion on OECD-DAC Evaluation Criteria Moderator: Adeline Sibanda, Chairperson, African Evaluation Association and International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation Speakers

Per Øyvind Bastoe, Director, NORAD Evaluation Department, and Chairperson, OECD/DAC Evaluation Network

Caroline Heider, Director-General and Senior Vice-President, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank Group

On the opening day of Evaluation Week 2018, a discussion session was held for AfDB staff and evaluators based in Abidjan on the development evaluation criteria established by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), as part of an ongoing worldwide consultation on the need to adapt the criteria to the new development context and landscape. The OECD/DAC criteria are a set of five criteria for evaluators to consider when evaluating development programs and projects. The criteria have been a strong foundation for international development evaluation since 1991. They have been the most prominent and widely adopted criteria used by most bilateral and multilateral donor agencies, including by IDEV, as well as international nongovernmental organizations.

After so many years of use, the DAC Evaluation Network is now examining whether, and if so, how the evaluation criteria should be adapted to the new development landscape and the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Agenda. To facilitate the review of the criteria, a broad stakeholder consultation is taking place through blogs, surveys,

workshops and conferences around the world. The discussion at the AfDB kicked off with a recognition of the critical role of evaluation, not just as a discipline, but as an important instrument of learning and accountability that strengthens achievement of development objectives. It was noted that much has changed in the world and the evaluation landscape has evolved, including in Africa. Participants were encouraged to let their voices be heard through tools that have been developed to enable broad stakeholders’ consultation including blogs, surveys, workshops, and conferences around the world. To contribute to the on-going debate during this session, the participants explored the adaptation of the criteria to the changing development context particularly in terms of implementation of development policies, projects and programs. It emerged that although the criteria are still relevant, they need to be adjusted to the unique context and the purpose of evaluations in Africa. This is more so important if they are to achieve the core purpose for which they were established. The DAC members established the criteria with an aim to ensure a better accountability towards their taxpayers as well as a better progress follow-up in pursuit of development goals. Emphasizing the importance of a common understanding of how evaluations are conducted and the context in which they take place, the discussion sought answers to the following questions:

Is it necessary to review or change the OECD-DAC criteria?

How should the criteria be used?

How can the criteria be adapted to the different types of evaluations (country/program/strategy/policy) and to the specific African development contexts?

What should we change or clarify in the evaluation criteria?

What type of guidance documents do evaluators need to manage assessments?

The discussion revealed a number of challenges that affect the current use of the OECD/DAC criteria including lack of alignment with the specific context, purpose and type of evaluation. The relationship between relevance and result was identified as a major issue that need to be reviewed. Most projects are deemed

Whatever the criteria, we should strive to balance accountability and learning from development results

What should we keep as is? What should we change or adapt? Are there new criteria that need to

be added?

10

satisfactory under the "relevance" criterion whereas the criterion has not been defined in an objective and harmonized approach that takes into account the needs and opinions of the final beneficiaries. While it is well-defined in terms of programmes, it has not been well-defined in terms of beneficiaries. Consequently, participants were unanimous that successful “relevance” has not always translated into successful project performance. They therefore emphasized the need for a more sophisticated and in-depth analysis of the “relevance” criterion to enable better understanding of the diverse groups affected by the projects. The “impact” criterion was also described as confusing as it is sometimes mistaken for impact evaluation, thus, it is important to explain the difference between the two. It was revealed that the “efficiency” criterion too requires review especially in terms of harmonization of the baseline for comparison as it largely depends on the context and the type of intervention. Concerns were raised regarding integration of cultural considerations that are specific to African countries in the formulation of evaluation issues and approaches. For example, some safe water points that are close to people's dwellings are not used in certain regions because women who are responsible for supplying water to households prefer to spend time together covering long distances in groups to fetch water. The rating process in evaluations was also cited as a matter of concern as it can sometimes be perceived negatively by some of the stakeholders. Participants also raised concerns over cross-cutting issues such as human rights, partnership, gender, and climate issues that are often overlooked by evaluators. Other issues include the attribution of results to a particular intervention and the consideration of unexpected results, which is a methodological problem to be addressed during discussions on the review of the OECD-DAC criteria. Participants also explored the strategies to help find the right equilibrium between accountability requirements and learning aspects of evaluation. It was observed that often, the outcome is skewed as more attention is given to the accountability outcome at the expense of the learning outcome. Although it has been widely recognized and accepted that not all criteria are relevant in the context of every evaluation, the importance of having a minimum framework as a frame of reference has been unchallenged and actually been reinforced as essential for the process of evaluation. In light of this, participants called for a more pragmatic approach to the use of this frame of reference. Participants underscored the importance of focusing the discussions on a culture-specific context. Indeed, participants acknowledged that culture, context and norms, can affect people’s experiences and relationships, and thus the way they receive and share knowledge, whether for evaluation or for other purposes. Consequently, participants emphasized the importance of aligning the discussion on evaluation and evaluation criteria with the African context in order to make them more relevant for evaluation units/departments such as IDEV.

Despite the highlighted challenges, the participants defended the five evaluation criteria and observed that they were efficient and had been producing good results. Caroline Heider agreed with this view point and suggested that “while there is no accurate answer, we can admit that each evaluator who has been using these criteria has two main questions in mind (i) how do we know that we are successful? (ii) what do we do to succeed?” To reinforce continued discussions on the suitability of the criteria, she added “the authors of these criteria were not aware of some things we know now, such as the current African realities. This is why we must engage in the discussion we are having today.” Participants were encouraged to continue the discussions on the various platforms that have been set up in order to deepen the reflection and harmonize the different points of view. It was concluded that evaluators need to prioritize a pragmatic and contextualized evaluation approach.

Caroline Heider emphasized the need to match the evaluation criteria with the current realities of the African continent

11

OPENING SESSION & WELCOMING CEREMONY Master of Ceremony: Magdaline Nkando, Knowledge Management Consultant, Independent

Development Evaluation, AfDB Introductory Remarks: Karen Rot-Münstermann, Acting Evaluator General, AfDB Welcome Remarks: Pierre Guislain, Vice-President, Private Sector, Infrastructure and

Industrialization, AfDB (on behalf of Akinwumi Adesina, President, AfDB) Keynote Speech: Aspirations for Africa: The Role of Evaluation and Learning Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation,

South Africa Discussion: Are we Learning? Moderator: Simon Mizrahi, Director, Delivery, Performance Management & Results Department, AfDB Discussants Per Øyvind Bastoe, Director, Norad Evaluation Department and Chairperson, OECD-DAC

Evaluation Network

Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, South Africa

Pierre Guislain, Vice President, Private Sector, Infrastructure & Industrialization, AfDB

Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent Evaluation Group,

World Bank Group

Hanan Morsy, Director, Macroeconomic Forecasting and Research, AfDB

This session explored the extent to which Africa is learning from evaluation and participants unanimously endorsed the importance of learning from the past, both from good and poor results. In her introductory remarks, the AfDB’s Acting Evaluator-General, Karen Rot-Münstermann, reiterated the critical role of evaluation in achieving Africa’s transformation agenda as stipulated in the African Union’s Agenda 2063 and the AfDB’s High 5s. President Akinwumi Adesina reaffirmed the Bank’s commitment to continuous learning in the remarks delivered on his behalf by Pierre Guislain. “Learning constructively from past successes, the Bank considers mistakes and experiences critical building blocks and tools for promoting accountability in development work, and key to for more powerful development impact”, he proclaimed, urging the participants to build a culture of grounding new policies, programs and projects on evidence of what has worked and not worked in the past as this would improve their quality and results.

Minister Dlamini-Zuma echoed this call for constructive learning as she observed that evidence-based decision-making was increasingly becoming crucial for achieving development outcomes. “It will be important that we regularly evaluate Agenda 2063, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the High 5”, Dlamini-Zuma added, urging the African Development Bank, the African Union, and the statisticians to work together in ensuring that credible data are available to underpin robust evaluations to guide the decision-making process. The panel discussion started off with an affirmation of the critical role of monitoring, evaluation and research as important sources of evidence and learning about what has worked, what has not, and why.

L-R: Panelists Per Øyvind Bastoe, Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, VP Pierre Guislain, Caroline Heider, and Hanan Morsy

12

The panelists were categorical that learning is not an option but a necessity, while they explored enablers and barriers to effective learning as well as suggestions on how the barriers could be addressed. Some of the impediments to learning that the panelists cited included: fear to face the pain of failure; institution-based cultural barriers; short-term planning practice; inadequate resources; slow pace of learning; disregard for homegrown solutions; reluctance to learn and share knowledge among the youth; formal nature of learning; inadequate investment in upstream learning; failure to mainstream evaluation in our daily work; lack of institutionalized learning incentives; limited consultation between the evaluation and operations teams; unavailability of relevant data; and skewed communication that glorifies mistakes at the expense of highlighting the success stories from across the continent. With all these challenges, how we can we turn our organizations and countries into more effective and efficient ones through evaluation?

Of all the challenges discussed, effective communication of knowledge from evaluation and stakeholder engagement stood out as some of the biggest and ones that require urgent and strategic remedy. It was said that the truth emerging from evaluation is not always welcome, but we can still achieve the intended goals by maintaining high quality standards; applying rigorous methodologies and careful analysis; engaging stakeholders throughout the evaluation process to ensure we are meeting their specific knowledge needs; and continuous knowledge and experience sharing to increase supply of and demand for evaluation in Africa. Participants agreed that an enabling environment was an essential success factor for learning and that one way to create it was by seeking opportunities for more interactions with colleagues to discuss the ongoing evaluations. It could also be achieved by moving away from ticking boxes and asking questions such as “is this really the best way of doing things? Do we have the right criteria?” It was noted that the debate about what should be the best approach when implementing

a project should take place upstream and that there should be more advocacy for evaluation in order to mobilize the budget required to undertake evaluations. Ownership by African States and mainstreaming of evaluation in national plans was considered a key starting point. The AfDB fully supports the African Union’s call to member countries to domesticate the Agenda 2063’s results framework into their national plans and systems to use as a basis for monitoring and evaluating their national development plans. To overcome the challenges identified above and achieve positive impact through learning, the panelists shared a number of suggestions including: establishing dedicated resources for monitoring and evaluation; increasing investments in homegrown solutions as well as identifying endogenous sources of funding. Other suggestions included mainstreaming strategic planning into evaluation processes; instilling a culture of learning that is backed by proactive leadership; increasing peer-to-peer learning opportunities to build capacity among ourselves; and creating standards to help identify credible and critical knowledge. Having humility to learn from mistakes and establishing a constructive mindset towards evaluation would break the cycle of suspicion between evaluators and operations teams. Learning from evaluations can also be improved by developing tools and procedures that help strengthen the bond of trust between citizens and governments; integrating introspective work into our activities; increasing investments upstream to facilitate lesson-learning from the onset; creating space for more dialogue between the operations and evaluation teams to aid in mainstreaming evaluation in day-to-day work; breaking the culture of silo working; advocating for revision of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that may limit learning opportunities; exploring diverse data collection and usage options that are available such as big data and data science; and creating opportunities for increased informal brainstorming to understand better how an organization learns as well as other cultural aspects that would affect the outcome of learning from evaluations.

Hanan Morsy encouraged evaluators to explore various data options and resources including big data and data scientists to inform evaluations

Karen Rot-Münstermann reminded participants that truth emerging from evaluations is not always welcome

13

THEMATIC SESSIONS Thematic Session I: Public-Private Partnerships for Infrastructure Development in Africa Discussion I: Bringing Down the Barriers for PPPs Moderator: Pierre Guislain, Vice President, Private Sector, Infrastructure & Industrialization, AfDB Keynote: PPPs in Africa - Current State and Potential Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent Evaluation Group,

World Bank Group Presentation: What Have we Learned From AfDB PPP Interventions? Foday Turay, Chief Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB Panel: Enablers and Stumbling Blocks for PPPs in Africa Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent Evaluation Group,

World Bank Group

Isabelle Van Grunderbeeck, Head of Regional Representation for West Africa, Regional Office for West Africa,, European Investment Bank

Amadou Oumarou, Director, Infrastructure, Cities and Urban Development Department, AfDB

Maude Vallee, Chief Legal Counsel, Acting Head of Operations, African Legal Support Facility Discussion II: From Lessons Learned to Action Panel: What Should we do for Better PPP Development Results?

Nana Asantewa Afadzinu, Executive Director, West Africa Civil Society Institute

Fatima Hamdouch, Director, Strategic Control, MASEN, Morocco

Romain Neyran, Chief Financial Officer, SOCOPRIM, Côte d’Ivoire

The discussions in this session focused on the potential of PPPs to contribute to greater development impact in Africa as well as the barriers that impede optimal utilization of PPPs to drive infrastructure development. The participants interrogated the enablers and stumbling blocks for PPPs in Africa in terms of, but not limited to, regulatory and institutional architectures; financial capabilities; technical capacity; political will; economic strength; and social consensus. They reflected on the lessons Africa has learned from PPP projects from across the continent and suggested strategies that could improve the quality and delivery of future PPPs. Participants argued that PPPs had achieved significant momentum in Africa which has been stimulated by a number of factors such as a widening financial gap; limited fiscal space; increased economic growth aspirations; and increased infrastructure needs. They suggested that PPPs could offer significant value and serve as a solution for overcoming shortages of upfront capital and skills needed to expedite the development of efficient infrastructure projects. Defining PPPs as a long-term contract for the supply of goods and services in which the private sector incurs important risks and management responsibility, Caroline Heider argued that PPPs were sought after because “there is a gap between the needs and on-going investments”. PPPs are particularly important in addressing the infrastructure gap in sub-Saharan Africa. It became apparent that relying on the governments to fill the huge infrastructure gap would raise their indebtedness to levels that are detrimental to economies.

Fatima Hamdouch called for the mainstreaming of regional components, inclusivity, and strong commitment of all stakeholders to the PPP projects

14

Although it was acknowledged that PPPs were not an end in themselves, participants considered mobilization of private funding for infrastructural development as critical for sub-Saharan Africa. Favourable conditions however must be in place for Africa to reap maximum benefits from PPPs. Some of the success factors that were discussed include, but are not limited to, coherent investment plans, strong and stable political commitment, the right institutional framework, appropriate governance, supportive legal and regulatory frameworks, adequate resources, adequate capacity in the public sector, inclusive and strategic stakeholder management; and transparency in the procurement process, characterized by open and competitive tenders. Technology and other innovations were also acknowledged as key drivers of PPP interventions. It was observed that there are several PPP experiences on the continent, and African countries were encouraged to make a deliberate effort to learn from each other’s experiences in PPPs. The AfDB’s Regional Member

Countries have demonstrated interest in PPPs, with statistics indicating that 33 countries enacted a PPP or concession law between 2004 and 2013, and 20 countries have adopted their PPP laws in the last 5 years. There are fewer than 10 African countries that currently do not have a PPP framework, and some of those have sectoral laws or procurement codes instead. Overall, it was suggested that PPP interventions would turn out well if the African countries would design a coherent and realistic investment plan, and if the government side of the PPP partnership would adequately prepare projects in time. In terms of timelines for formulation and enforcement of legal and regulatory frameworks, the panelists were unanimous that there is no single roadmap to design and implementation of PPPs. While for some countries it would be more appropriate to enact a PPP policy before the project starts, for others, the policy could be formulated during implementation of a PPP project. Maude Vallee however noted that “a PPP law doesn’t necessarily result in PPP projects” as there are many other factors that influence the partnership. For instance, considering the long-term nature of a PPP commitment, it emerged that there is room for renegotiation in light of the changing context for PPPs’ implementation, such as changes in costs, technology, and political environment. Participants were therefore urged to always be prepared for contingencies including terms and conditions that may require adjustments. There are however potential disadvantages of renegotiation, which may include increase in costs. Besides improving the efficiency of the project and providing alternative financing, additional benefits of PPPs were identified, including improved supervision as a result of involvement of external actors in the projects; higher safeguards standards; and technological and innovation advancement. The participants expressed optimism that PPPs can be the future of infrastructure in Africa and to achieve this, governments must feel free to negotiate contracts for PPP projects with the private sector; build the right capacity to be able to transact with the private sector; increase investments in skilled and experienced human resources; and ensure proactive involvement of all relevant stakeholders. Caroline Heider suggested that “we should use PPPs to support greater equality and poverty reduction’’.

Nana Afadzinou emphasized ownership as the key driver of PPPs, and advocated for an additional ‘P’ (‘Population’) to garner full involvement of the citizens and the civil society in PPP projects

Isabelle Van Grunderbeek drew the attention of the participants to the disadvantages of renegotiation in designing a PPP project, which may increase its costs

15

Thematic Session II: Inclusion Through Agriculture Discussion I: Challenges and Opportunities for Agricultural Value Chains in Africa Moderator: Patrick Zimpita, Executive Director, AfDB Keynote: Nutrition and Inclusion – A Multisectoral Approach

Wambui Gichuri, Director, Water & Sanitation, AfDB Presentation: AfDB’s Support to Agricultural Value Chains Development

Girma Kumbi, Principal Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB Panel I: Agricultural Value Chains in Africa - Challenges & Opportunities

Koffi Amegbeto, Senior Policy Officer, Regional Office for Africa, FAO

Fabrizio Felloni, Deputy Director, Independent Office of Evaluation, IFAD

Kodjo Kondo, Programme Officer, Monitoring & Evaluation, AGRA Discussion II: Towards Inclusive Value Chain Development Moderator: Youssouf N’Djore, Director, Social Development, World Cocoa Foundation Panel II: Towards Inclusive Value Chain Development

Aboegnonhou Chaldia Agossou, Seed Services, Benin

Troels Egeskov Sorensen, Fragility and Resilience Expert, Transition Countries Coordination Office, AfDB

Enock Warinda, Theme Leader-Knowledge Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, The Association for Strengthening of Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA)

Koffi Amegbeto, Senior Policy Officer, Regional Office for Africa, FAO

Participants in this session focused on the potential of agricultural value chains as viable instruments for driving Africa’s transformation agenda as envisaged in the African Union’s Agenda 2063, and in particular in achieving inclusion. They interrogated the challenges and opportunities for agricultural value chains in Africa in terms of, but not limited to, scale of operations; level and nature of coordination; status of institutional arrangements; financial and technical capabilities; impact of climate change; political and socio-economic climate; strength of market networks; stability and security; quality of stakeholders’ engagement; and most importantly, level of inclusion. They explored the context of agricultural inclusion from diverse perspectives including poverty, gender, youth engagement, fragility, water resource management, infrastructure, and technology.

Participants acknowledged the multisectoral nature of agricultural value chains development and suggested that Africa can achieve its agricultural objectives only when sectors work together. It was observed that a multisectoral approach would strengthen inclusion, as the most vulnerable populations in the agricultural value chain would be supported. Participants discussed other key success factors for effective agricultural value chain development, including strong and supportive leadership, strong innovation in financing, forward-looking strategies especially in transition states, reliable infrastructure and technology, an enabling policy and regulatory environment, continuous gender mainstreaming, and strategic partnerships among all relevant agricultural stakeholders. The discussion emphasized the need to strike a balance between profitability and production throughout the value chain.

Other success factors that were identified include an integrated approach to ensure that the whole system works. Advising that “we should not only focus on production but the entire value chain”, Wambui Gichuri suggested that agricultural value chains failed to perform because of fragmentation in their development. She observed that previously, water for irrigation programs focused on building water infrastructure without much thought about on-farm practices and whatever else happened after. Enhanced ownership was described as key to boosting sustainability of agricultural value chains. Other

Wambui Gichuri underscored the importance of unity, arguing that development will happen only when sectors work together

16

key enablers that were identified include strategic partnerships; a concrete strategy to scale up from low agricultural productivity systems; promoting consumption of local foods; and conducting value stream mapping as a critical procedure in value chains analysis. Despite the high level of awareness of the enabling factors for successful agricultural value chains development, it was observed that there was a conspicuous imbalance between supply and demand in the process of development of agricultural value chains in Africa. The needs for agricultural value chains across the continent are usually higher than the efforts to develop them. Other challenges that were identified include adverse effects of climate change on agricultural production; inefficient policy and inadequate legal and regulatory systems; inadequate government support in terms of providing the most basic agricultural inputs such as affordable fertilizer, improved seeds and agricultural mechanization; poor water resources management; and low capacity within the private sector in the mobilization of funds. It was also revealed that the role of the public and private sectors in the development of agricultural value chains is often unclear. While participants recognized the existence of competent technical specialists in public agencies, it was observed that only a few of them have experience in agricultural value chain development. Consequently, there are deficiencies in capacity to prepare solid business cases that would convince the private sector to participate in agricultural value chains development. The discussion concluded that sustainable value chains development requires long-term commitments and financing, which calls for investment from all relevant stakeholders including the private sector. Some of the areas that require urgent attention in investment include development of agricultural value chains infrastructure; better management of natural resources; improved protection of the environment to avert adverse effects of climate change; more involvement of women and youth in the development of value chains; structured mapping of value chains to identify and prioritize the needs; and increased use of ICTs as effective tools for facilitating inclusion. Considering the high risk of fragility in African countries as a result of climate change and social inequity, participants underscored the urgency to develop resilient infrastructure to protect agricultural produce from destruction by recurrent floods and droughts. It was observed that fragility interventions are often short-term, and it was suggested that while there is need to look at short-term consequences, we must not lose sight of the long-term impacts. It was recommended that fragility interventions should factor in climate change assessments as well as mainstream gender. This would include designing methods and tools for fragility assessments in each country; and formulating and enforcing laws that would reduce inequalities and protect women from the negative impact of market forces.

To improve sustainability of the value chain, participants advocated for design of innovative financing mechanisms that take into account the unique needs of small-scale producers and women; training programs in management and leadership; and adaptive management in project design and implementation, fully supported by a robust M&E system. Adaptive management was proposed as a means to ensure flexibility, considering that project preparation takes long, during which circumstances change, and for these projects to make a meaningful impact, there is need to be flexible so as to respond to changes, realities, and priorities during design. The M&E process should be backed by a comprehensive analysis at project design and its subsequent adaptation during implementation. The analysis was recognized as a critical input

to inform project and program design and improve implementation, including of agricultural value chains, with far-reaching gains to their sustainability. The discussion underscored the importance of taking full advantage of the AfDB’s comparative advantage, noting that beyond financial support, the Bank possesses significant technical knowledge and analytical capacity. It was concluded that agricultural value chains development requires a comprehensive package of support in which the private sector, the government, the development community, and the civil society all work together in strategic partnerships.

Kodjo Kondo made a case for more intake of indigenous foods and innovation in agricultural inputs including new seed varieties

Fabrizio Felloni broke down sustainability into several facets including economic, financial, environmental, social, and institutional

17

Thematic Session III: Partnerships for Impact in Africa Moderator: Catherine Cudré-Mauroux, Executive Director, AfDB Keynote: Partnerships to Advance Supply, Demand and Use of Evaluations

Michele Tarsilla, Regional Evaluation Adviser, United Nations Children’s Education Fund (UNICEF) Discussants

Abdoulaye Gounou, Head of Office, Public Policy Evaluation and Analysis of Government Actions, Presidency, Republic of Benin / Chairperson, Twende Mbele initiative

Abbas Imbassou Ouattara, Member of Parliament of Côte d’Ivoire and Executive Committee member, African Parliamentarians’ Network on Development Evaluation

Adeline Sibanda, Chairperson, African Evaluation Association and International Organization for

Cooperation in Evaluation

Laila Smith, Director, Center for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR) Anglophone Africa

Discussions in this session focused on how the supply of and demand for evaluations in Africa can be increased and particularly on how partnerships could help to build the supply of high-quality evaluations on the continent; stimulate demand for evaluations; encourage learning from evaluations; and promote use of evaluation in policy- and decision-making. Participants explored the avenues through which partnerships could build capacity and leverage multiple resources and skills to address complex evaluation questions and/or initiatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Africa Agenda 2063 in an inclusive manner, through among others, strategic collaborations among diverse stakeholders including governments, development partners, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), VOPEs, and the private sector. The importance of unity was underscored as one of the critical enablers of effective evaluation, through which the different perspectives and comparative advantages of diverse stakeholders can be tapped. Noting the complexity of the development and evaluation context in Africa, participants were challenged to think outside the box, by among other things, expanding the scope of evaluation partnerships and capacity development efforts. Though recognized as one of the most effective avenues for achieving unity to increase supply of and demand for evaluations, partnerships in evaluation were described as complex, as they are constructed around people, politics and relational issues. Participants acknowledged the importance of finding a good balance between these aspects during the process of partnerships development. This would include, but not be limited to, clearly defining the rationale of the partnership; adopting a pragmatic approach in the identification and engagement of the various stakeholders; conducting a structured mapping of potential actors; mixing traditional and non-traditional actors in creating an evaluation partnership; developing a shared vision; establishing mutual trust; developing a theory of change behind the partnership; adopting flexibility; establishing good communication; and being ready to compromise. The latter three elements were deemed key enablers of evaluation partnership building, since partnership is an evolution and not a static phenomenon. “The SDGs are pushing us to cover everything, everywhere, all the time; so we can’t restrict our partnership to evaluators only”, Michele Tarsilla stated, as he advised participants to work with diverse evaluation stakeholders, as success would not be achieved by adopting a reductionist view that confines the process to sectoral or disciplinary boundaries.

Michele Tarsilla advocated for a well-articulated formal commitment (ToR) that defines the roles and responsibilities of each partner

18

Country ownership and buy-in were identified as crucial drivers in promoting supply of and demand for evaluation. When for instance a national evaluation policy is endorsed by the respective country’s Cabinet, it enables the country to define its own evaluation system, define the type of engagement with its financiers, set the priorities of what’s to be evaluated, shape the Terms of Reference, and ensure active involvement of local evaluators. A national evaluation policy was considered to be a key enabler of countries’ ownership, as it provides a concrete entry point for engagement, ensuring that evaluations have some domestic credibility and match the local context. When an evaluation policy is not in place, there is not much to stand on. The discussion also emphasized the importance of incentives in driving evaluation partnerships and underscored the need to match

the incentives to the different contexts to ensure that the support provided resonates with the stakeholders. In case of a mismatch, the incentives would unlikely achieve their objectives and there is likely to be low uptake of the knowledge from evaluations. Other enablers of supply of and demand for evaluation that were highlighted include early engagement with key constituencies (including the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary) to create an enabling environment within a country or a region; evaluation guidelines to regulate the quality of evaluation courses offered in Africa; continuous research to determine the aspects of the African context that need to be considered; structured capacity building including needs analysis to assess the core competencies required in evaluation and supporting professionalization of evaluation on the continent; establishment of a context-based curriculum tailored to the specific evaluation needs on the continent; transfer of applied knowledge into academic discourse; establishment of a mentoring and internship program for young and emerging evaluators; growing the pipeline of African evaluators to work on evaluation of programs and projects on the continent; increased Technical Assistance to motivate decision-makers to create infrastructure and resources for M&E; increased advocacy for establishment of evaluation frameworks including national evaluation systems; increased advocacy and campaigns for behaviour change to promote a culture of using evidence for learning, planning, and decision-making; strategic mapping of knowledge networks that can disseminate good practices around the use of M&E; encouraging innovation in conducting evaluations; and forging partnership with people who fund special editions of the African Evaluation Journal to get the message across.

The discussion also highlighted key challenges, including difficulties in structuring a meaningful engagement with the civil society as their pathways of change in the national evaluation space is not clear; a disconnect between the formulation of a national evaluation policy and its implementation; insufficient funds in government ministries to conduct field visits to increase their understanding of

Adeline Sibanda (middle) advocated for increased investment to grow the pipeline of evaluators in Africa and from Africa to promote “Made-in-Africa” evaluation. AfrEA has been providing capacity building to achieve this in partnership with key actors including CLEAR, the Association of African Universities, and USAID.

19

exactly what evaluation entails in practice; and inadequate M&E tools and techniques to assess and disseminate findings on effectiveness of evaluation partnerships. A number of risks faced in the establishment and operation of evaluation partnerships were discussed, including uncertainty in continuity due to high staff turnover in organizations and government ministries from which partnerships’ coordinators and champions are drawn; too many structures and processes that could discourage critical potential partners from joining; rigid Terms of Reference that define specific roles and responsibilities for each of the partners in terms of supply or demand, which ultimately takes away the flavour of variety that a partnership could offer; lack of a well-established and well-articulated formal commitment, leading to unclear roles and responsibilities of each of the partners; conflicts arising from competition among partners over the partnership’s leadership; and costly duplication of interventions owing to poor stakeholder mapping that leads to omission of key stakeholders from the partnership. The discussion concluded that evaluation partnerships exist in many types and forms, thus, to be effective, we need to identify the different types and typologies as each of the partnerships entails a different process, results, modalities of interventions and effects. There was consensus that evaluation is a process and not a report or a product, in which every party is expected to gain as much value as they bring in; the evaluation partnership is likely to evolve over time; we shouldn’t oversimply evaluation into a supply-demand equation because the evaluation reality is complex; since partnerships evolve over time, it is important to focus on the values and the purpose on which the partnership is built; there should be a formal agreement; the partnership process should be strategic and pragmatic; partnerships should be drawn within sectors and across sectors; and as a tool, partnerships would lead to greater good.

KEY TAKEAWAYS The African Development Bank's Evaluation Week 2018 ended on a high note, having maintained a full auditorium for the two days of plenary deliberations after over-subscribed pre-conference sessions. As it ended, four things stood out as key elements that would improve the value of evaluations for strengthening development impact going forward: Stakeholder engagement: This is not only important for the design and implementation of interventions, but also for evaluation. A stronger evaluation process requires efforts on the part of the evaluator to identify stakeholders and to ensure that engagement with them is maintained throughout the process, but it also requires efforts on the part of the stakeholders to truly participate in the process, considering engagement is a two-way street. Context: It is very important for the evaluators to understand the context in which the evaluation is taking place and take it into account throughout the evaluation process. This understanding helps in refining the meaningful questions and crafting a reliable, dependable, and believable methodology. Application of existing knowledge: Despite the huge potential of agriculture in Africa, its performance is still very low in terms of productivity, its part in the global value chain, and high imports. How can this be turned around with the help of development partners? How can we enhance the existing knowledge to change this narrative? We should use the existing knowledge to avoid re-inventing the wheel, e.g. by adapting the green revolution knowledge to the African context. Relationship between the evaluator and the researcher on one side, and the policy-maker, decision-maker and implementor on the other side: A lot of research and knowledge is produced, but their usage doesn’t match the production - e.g. different agriculture research centers produce improved seeds and technologies but farmers seldom adopt them. Knowledge and experience must be relevant in order to increase their use. The intended end-users of evaluation and research should be consulted up-front so that the ownership and use of the knowledge can be enhanced.

Citing the impressive progress made by Twende Mbele, Abdoulaye Gounou lauded partnerships for their key contribution to capacity building and training in Africa

20

ANNEXES

Annex 1: Agenda

Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire 5-7 September 2018

Day 1: WEDNESDAY 5 SEPTEMBER 2018 9:00 – 12:00 KNOWLEDGE CAFÉ: EVALUATIONS FOR GREATER IMPACT IN BANK

OPERATIONS (FOR AfDB STAFF) Coordinator: Jayne Musumba

12:00 – 14:00 NETWORKING LUNCH 09:00 – 15:00 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP: GENDER AND EVALUATION

Coordinator: Monica Lomena-Gelis, in collaboration with Gender, Women and Civil Society (AHGC), The African Development Bank and The Independent Evaluation Group (IEG), The World Bank Group

15:00 – 17:00 A DISCUSSION ON OECD-DAC EVALUATION CRITERIA Day 2: THURSDAY 6 SEPTEMBER 2018 9:00 – 10:00 REGISTRATION 10:00 – 10:30 OPENING SESSION 10:00 – 10:05 Introductory Remarks

o Evaluator General, AfDB 10:05 – 10:15 Welcome Remarks

o Akinwumi Adesina, President, AfDB 10:15 - 10:30 Welcoming Ceremony 10:30 - 11:00 KEYNOTE: Aspirations for Africa: The role of evaluation and learning

o Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, South Africa

11:00 – 11:45 DISCUSSION: Are we learning?

Moderator: Simon Mizrahi, Director, Delivery, Performance Management & Results Department, AfDB Discussants: o Per Øyvind Bastoe, Director, Norad Evaluation Department and Chairperson,

OECD-DAC Evaluation Network o Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Minister in the Presidency for Planning, Monitoring

and Evaluation, South Africa o Pierre Guislain, Vice President, Private Sector, Infrastructure & Industrialization,

AfDB o Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent

Evaluation Group, World Bank Group o Hanan Morsy, Director, Macroeconomic Forecasting and Research, AfDB

11:45 - 12:30 Q&A with audience 12:30 – 14:00 NETWORKING LUNCH

21

14:00 – 17:30 THEMATIC SESSION I: PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA

DISCUSSION I: BRINGING DOWN THE BARRIERS FOR PPPs Moderator: Pierre Guislain, Vice President, Private Sector, Infrastructure & Industrialization, AfDB

14:00 – 14:15 Keynote: PPPs in Africa: current state and potential o Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent

Evaluation Group, World Bank Group

14:15 – 14:25 Presentation: What have we learned from AfDB PPP interventions? o Foday Turay, Principal Post Evaluation Officer, Independent Development

Evaluation, AfDB 14:25 – 15:15 Panel: Enablers and stumbling blocks for PPPs in Africa

o Caroline Heider, Director General and Senior Vice President, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank Group

o Isabelle Van Grunderbeeck, Head of Regional Representation for West Africa, Regional Office for West Africa,, European Investment Bank

o Amadou Oumarou, Director, Infrastructure, Cities and Urban Development Department, AfDB

o Maude Vallee, Chief Legal Counsel, Acting Head of Operations, African Legal Support Facility

15:15 – 15:45 Q & A with audience 15:45 – 16:00 Coffee break

DISCUSSION II: FROM LESSONS LEARNED TO ACTION

16:00 – 16:40 Panel: What should we do for better PPP development results? o Nana Asantewa Afadzinu, Executive Director, West Africa Civil Society Institute o Fatima Hamdouch, Director, Strategic Control, MASEN, Morocco o Romain Neyran, Chief Financial Officer, SOCOPRIM, Côte d’Ivoire

16:40 – 17:20 Q & A with audience 17:20 – 17:30 Closing remarks: Key takeaways

Pierre Guislain, Vice President, Private Sector, Infrastructure & Industrialization, AfDB

18:00 WELCOME RECEPTION

22

Day 3: FRIDAY 7 SEPTEMBER 2018 8:00 – 9:00 Registration 9:00 – 12:30 THEMATIC SESSION II: INCLUSION THROUGH AGRICULTURE

Moderator: Patrick Zimpita, Executive Director, AfDB 9:00 – 9:15 Keynote: Maximizing the impact of agricultural value chain investments

o Wambui Gichuri, Director, Water & Sanitation, AfDB 9:15 – 9:25 Presentation: AfDB’s support to agricultural value chains development

o Girma Kumbi, Principal Evaluation Officer, Independent Development Evaluation, AfDB

9:25 – 10:15 Panel I: Agricultural value chains in Africa: challenges & opportunities o Koffi Amegbeto, Senior Policy Officer, Regional Office for Africa, FAO o Fabrizio Felloni, Deputy Director, Independent Office of Evaluation, IFAD o Kodjo Kondo, Programme Officer, Monitoring & Evaluation, AGRA

10:15 – 10:45 Q & A with audience

10:45 – 11:00 Coffee break 11:00 – 11:40 Panel II: Towards inclusive value chain development

Moderator: Youssouf N’Djore, Director, Social Development, World Cocoa Foundation o Aboegnonhou Chaldia Agossou, Seed Services, Benin o Troels Egeskov Sorensen, Fragility and Resilience Expert, Transition Countries

Coordination Office, AfDB o Enock Warinda, Theme Leader-Knowledge Management, Monitoring and

Evaluation, The Association for Strengthening of Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA)

o Koffi Amegbeto, Senior Policy Officer, Regional Office for Africa, FAO

11:40 – 12:00 Q & A with audience

12:10 – 12:30 Closing remarks: Key takeaways o Fabrizio Felloni, Deputy Director, Independent Office of Evaluation, IFAD o Wambui Gichuri, Director, Water Development & Sanitation, AfDB

12:30 – 14:00 NETWORKING LUNCH 14:00 – 16:30 THEMATIC SESSION III: PARTNERSHIPS FOR IMPACT IN AFRICA

Moderator: Catherine Cudré-Mauroux, Executive Director, AfDB

14:00 – 14:30 Keynote: Partnerships to advance supply, demand and use of evaluations o Michelle Tarsilla, Regional Evaluation Adviser, United Nations Children’s

Education Fund (UNICEF) 14:30 – 15:30 Discussants:

o Abdoulaye Gounou, Head of Office, Public Policy Evaluation and Analysis of Government Actions, Presidency, Republic of Benin / Chairperson, Twende Mbele initiative

o Abbas Imbassou Ouattara, Member of Parliament of Côte d’Ivoire and Executive Committee member, African Parliamentarians’ Network on Development Evaluation

o Adeline Sibanda, Chairperson, African Evaluation Association and International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation

o Laila Smith, Director, Center for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR) Anglophone Africa

15:30 – 16:30 Q & A with audience 16:30 – 16:50 Coffee break 17:20 CLOSING

23

Annex 2: List of Participants

Title Nom Prenom Organization Position in your Organization

Country of residence

1. Mr. Abdoulaye Son RISE Membre Côte d'Ivoire

2. Mr. Abondo Koffi Mathias ONG DOMINKALEE Président Côte d'Ivoire

3. Mr. ACAKPO-ADDRA Alain ASSEMBLEE NATIONALE DE CÔTE D'IVOIRE

DIRECTEUR DES SERVICES LEGISLATIFS

Côte d'Ivoire

4. Ms. ACHO Carine Bertille Reseau Ivoirien de suivi-evaluation

Membre Côte d'Ivoire

5. Mr. ADAMA DAO ONG ADDY VICE PRÉSIDENT Côte d'Ivoire

6. Mr. ADDY ARSENE TAKUI ONG ADDY PRESIDENT Côte d'Ivoire

7. Mr. Adjé Sosthène ONG ARSE CI Responsable Communication

Côte d'Ivoire

8. Ms. Adjomani Eudoxie Ahou Yah

ONG CARITAS SAN PEDRO

Chargé du suivi évaluation Côte d'Ivoire

9. Ms. ADJOUA NICOLE ANOUGBRE ONG OREBSS PRESIDENTE Côte d'Ivoire

10. Mr. Ago jean roch williams Association Action Paix et Developpement

President de la section Cote d ivoire

Côte d'Ivoire

11. Dr. Agré Joseph Okoué Consultant Indépendant Consultant indépendant Côte d'Ivoire

12. AHISSI Armel Aka Eic corporation Formateur en education financière et en entrepreneuriat

Côte d'Ivoire

13. Mr. AKA BROU YANNICK-NOEL

MEST Africa EIT Côte d'Ivoire

14. Prof. AKA Kouadio Akou Université FHB de Cocody, Abidjan

Enseignant-Chercheur, Géographe

Côte d'Ivoire

15. Mr. AKA KOUAKOU EMMANUEL

Université Étudiant chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

16. Ms. AKA Leopoldine BCP-Emploi Chargée de la Gestion de la base de données à la cellule suivi-Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

17. Mr. AKA RABELAI MARCHAL

LAMPE-UAO Auditeur Côte d'Ivoire

18. Dr. AKOUA ASSUNTA

ADAYÉ Université Félix HOUPHOUËT-BOIGNY

ENSEIGNANT-CHERCHEUR

Côte d'Ivoire

19. Mrs. Akouani Landry Jacqueline ONG DOMINKALEE Trésorière Générale Côte d'Ivoire

20. Mr. AKPAGNONDE Koffi Toussaint UFR Sciences Economiques

Doctorant Côte d'Ivoire

21. Ms. AKPOUE ADJOUA MARIE CHARLOTTE

Yes Green Earth Adjointe chargée de projet Côte d'Ivoire

22. Mr. ALADJI OUATTARA YOUTH LEADERS CO FONDATEUR et SECRETAIRE GENERAL

Côte d'Ivoire

23. Mrs. Allali épouse kouakou

aya solange chaire unesco auditrice suivi évaluation Côte d'Ivoire

24. Mr. ALLUI Kouassi Nazère RISE Manager de Projets Côte d'Ivoire

25. Mr. Amani Yao Cédric U report côté d'Ivoire Membre u report Yopougon Côte d'Ivoire

26. Mrs. AMANI Epse AIOUO

AFFOUE SYLVIE PAIA-ID/PDC-ID Expert en Environnement Côte d'Ivoire

24

27. Dr. Amegbeto Koffi FAO-UN Senior Policy Officer Ghana

28. Dr. Ameyaw David International Center for Evaluation and Development

President/CEO Kenya

29. Mr. AMONCHI Roger Jean Jaurès

G54 Afrique section Côte d'Ivoire

Secrétaire chargé de l'environnement et du développement durable

Côte d'Ivoire

30. Mrs. Andjembe Elobo Marcelle Tetra Tech ARD Coordiantrice Suivi-Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

31. Mr. Angaman Kadio Valère Rodolphe

Étudiant Master 2 Côte d'Ivoire

32. Mr. ANZARA XAVIER FABRICE MEA

Université Alassane Ouattara

Etudiant Côte d'Ivoire

33. Mr. APAHOU Yao Roger Modeste

RI2E Président Côte d'Ivoire

34. Dr. Arkorful Kingsley African Evaluation Association

Executive Director Ghana

35. Ms. ASSERI Kanga Diaz Melodie

Association Générale des Doctorants de l'Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny(AGED)

Trésorière adjointe Côte d'Ivoire

36. Mr. ASSI Bertrand Sylvestre CREMIDE / UFHB Assistant de Recherche Côte d'Ivoire

37. Mr. ASSI Kouassi Jean Claude

ASSEMBLEE NATIONALE DE COTE D'IVOIRE

Chargé des Etudes et des Statistiques

Côte d'Ivoire

38. Dr. ASSOMA Vincent Tchimou CURAT - Université Félix Houphouet-Boigny

Enseignant - Chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

39. Mr. ATSE Kambo Martial Universite Felix Houphouet-Boigny de Cocody

Doctorant Côte d'Ivoire

40. Mr. ATSIN ABE THIBAUT DAVY

ECOLE DOCTORALE MEMBRE

41. Ms. AZIANTI Amavi Kafui Société Togolaise de l'évaluation

Evaluateur émergent Togo

42. Mr. Badji ABDOULAYE RISE Membre Côte d'Ivoire

43. Mr. Baguia El Allassane PNUD Côte d'Ivoire Spécialiste Programme (ODD)

Côte d'Ivoire

44. Dr. BAILLY Soumaila RISE Responsable du Groupe de Travail : Démocratie, Participation citoyenne, Gouvernance

Côte d'Ivoire

45. Ms. Bongo Tanon Augustine Ashci-association handicap CI

presidente section Yopougon

Côte d'Ivoire

46. Mr. BONI AGBE PIERRE CLAVER

JOHNS HOPKINS Centre des Programmes de Communication

Attaché de Site Côte d'Ivoire

47. Ms. Chaldia AGOSSOU Seed Services, Laboratory of Genetics Horticulture and Seed Science

CEO Seed Services Benin

48. Mr. CISSE VASSIRIKI CURAT/EDAT de l'Université Félix Houphouët de COCODY

Enseignant chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

49. Ms. Clydesdale Katrina The HALO Trust Programme Manager

50. Mr. Comlan Fiacre PHOENIX ENERGY Directeur Général Côte d'Ivoire

51. Mr. Coulibaly Daouda Association SEPHIS bénévole (à la mobilisation) Côte d'Ivoire

52. Dr. COULIBALY Gninlwélé Solange

Ministère de la Santé Chargée d'Etudes, Comm, Projets,

Côte d'Ivoire

53. Mr. Coulibaly Kicoun Alphonse GEOTROPIC.SARL Consultant SIG Côte d'Ivoire

25

54. Mr. COULIBALY MAMADOU Université Félix Houphouet Boigny

DOCTORANT Côte d'Ivoire

55. Mr. COULIBALY Mamadou Ministère du Plan et du Développement

Chargé de Planification, de Suivi et d'Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

56. Mr. COULIBALY Sié Issouf SGDA Gérant-associé Côte d'Ivoire

57. Mr. Coulibaly Siriki International Rescue Committee

Coach consultant en Entreprenariat

Côte d'Ivoire

58. Mr. COULIBALY Tiorna N'Golodin Secrétariat National DES Capacités (SNRC)

Directeur du Suivi-Évaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

59. Ms. Coulibaly Yasmina CABINET ILCA CONSEIL PDG, conseiller juridique Côte d'Ivoire

60. Mr. Coulibaly Zanna Drissa Rojalnu Côte d'Ivoire Président Côte d'Ivoire

61. Mr. DAGNIOGO Aboubacar CN-MAEP Statisticien Économiste Côte d'Ivoire

62. Mr. DAHOU Amadou Mouvement Ivoirien des Droits Humains (MIDH)

Chargé de Programme Education et Suivi-évaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

63. Mr. DAOUDA TRAORE Conseil des Jeunes de CI, Grand-Bassam

Président départemental Côte d'Ivoire

64. Mr. Diabate Mamadou Djemory

AREI / MENETFP Secrétaire générale Côte d'Ivoire

65. Mrs. DIABATE Epse KOUYATE

Yakiéma RISE Responsable du groupe thématique Genre et Droit de l'homme

Côte d'Ivoire

66. Mr. Diaby Aboubacar African Risk Capacity Senior M&E Officer South Africa

67. Mr. Diallo Mamadou Tahirou AIESEC Team member administration

Côte d'Ivoire

68. Dr. DIANE Maxime IPCI Chatgé de la gestion des données au centre des ressources biologiques à l'unité de data management

Côte d'Ivoire

69. Mr. DIARRA BAKARY Laboratoire d'Analyse et de Modélisation des Politiques Economiques (LAMPE-CI)

Etudiant Chercheur Et Président Du Millennium Investment Corporation

Côte d'Ivoire

70. Mr. Diarrassouba Abdoul Aziz AL Khadamat Président Côte d'Ivoire

71. Mr. DIAW Mouhamadou Moustapha

Projet d'Appui à la Sécurité Alimentaire au Sénégal (PASA Lou-Ma-Kaf)

Coordonnateur National du Projet

Senegal

72. Mr. DIAYOKA GANGA

restitut Ignace Societe Nationale d'Electricité (Energie Electrique du Congo)

Chef de division Etudes Econmiques (en stage de formation en CI)

Côte d'Ivoire

73. Mr. DIGBE Franck Agence Emploi Jeunes Deputy Director of M&E Côte d'Ivoire

74. Mr. DIO JEAN SATURNIN CURAT ASSISTANT DE RECHERCHE

Côte d'Ivoire

75. Mr. DISCOUR Matthieu AGENCE FRANÇAISE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT

Directeur Régional Golfe de Guinée

Côte d'Ivoire

76. Mr. Djedou Djagogne De David

Chaire UNESCO Auditeurs Côte d'Ivoire

77. Ms. Dogou Ruth Université Jean Lorougnon Guédé de Daloa

Etudiante en Master 2 d'économie

Côte d'Ivoire

78. Mr. DONGO Bouanzi Cédrick pâcome

Université Alassane Ouattara

Étudiant Côte d'Ivoire

79. Mr. Dosso Ibrahim Réseau ivoirien des Evaluateurs Emergents

Membre Côte d'Ivoire

80. Mr. DOSSO MOUHAMADOU APEE DE CÔTE D'IVOIRE Président Côte d'Ivoire

81. Mr. Dosso Tiemoko ONG OMED President Fondateur Côte d'Ivoire

26

82. Mr. EHOUSSOU Bosson Jean MINISTÈRE DE L'EDUCATION NATIONALE

GESTIONNAIRE Côte d'Ivoire

83. Mr. Épiphane Marahoua ENSEA Chercheur-Junior Côte d'Ivoire

84. Mr. ESSOH NIAGNE HARRIS Chaire UNESCO-CHAIRE Cote d'Ivoire

Doctorant, Option evaluation environnementale

Côte d'Ivoire

85. Mr. FABIAN Effébi Ahoua Consultant indépendant Chef d'entreprise Côte d'Ivoire

86. Mr. GABA Dogo Didier ISDREAM FOUNDATION Directeur des Opérations Côte d'Ivoire

87. Mr. GBA Gonta Office National d'Identification (ONI), Ministère de l'Intérieur et de la Sécurité

Assistant Directeur des Opérations

Côte d'Ivoire

88. Mr. Gbeuly Martial Thibaut THE HALO TRUST Field Officer Côte d'Ivoire

89. Mr. GBSA KONTOA Bakpatina Société Togolaise de l'Evaluation-Evaluateurs-Emergengents (STéval-Ee)

Président du CA Togo

90. Mr. Geoffroy Mian MINISTERE de la santé et de l’hygiene Publiques

Personnel technique Côte d'Ivoire

91. Mr. GNACHOUE Guiro Thierry UQAM Etudiant en Évaluation Canada

92. Mr. GNAGBO DJEKOU CHRISTIAN

INSPECTION GENERALE DES SPORTS

INSPECTEUR DE MINISTERE

Côte d'Ivoire

93. Mrs. GNAGBO GROUANEHON MARIE FLORE

CONSEIL NATIONAL DES SPORTS

CHARGE DE L'EVALUATION POLITIQUE SPORT

Côte d'Ivoire

94. Mr. GNAGNE Kévin Indépendant Juriste environnementaliste Côte d'Ivoire

95. Mr. GNOBO Atto KIDS HOUSE Responsable Communication

Côte d'Ivoire

96. Mr. Goze Nicaise Ezechiel Direction de la Dette Publique et Des Dons

Chargé D'Etude Côte d'Ivoire

97. Ms. GUE OUEUHI EDWIGE JACQUELINE

UNDP RCA FORMER HEAD OF OFFICE- LIVELIHOOD TECHNICAL ADVISOR

Côte d'Ivoire

98. Dr. Guede Yacouba NANGUE CIRES Dr Vétérinaire / Assistant chercheur

Côte d'Ivoire

99. Ms. HADEOU Amen Indépendante Consultante Benin

100. Mrs. Hamdouch Fatima Masen Directeur Pilotage Stratégique

Morocco

101. Ms. Hanghuwo Rauna Nelao Roads Authority Executive Officer: Engineering Services

Namibia

102. Ms. Hien Jacqueline Chance

Réseau Ivoirien de Suivi Évaluation

Membre permanent Côte d'Ivoire

103. Ms. HONOZÉLÉ STÉPHANIE

LAZILÉ Geoplanet Assistante du Pca Côte d'Ivoire

104. Mr. HOUNDEBASSO Koffi Société Togolaise de l'Evaluation-Evaluateurs-Emergengents (STéval-Ee)

Coordonnateur National Togo

105. Ms. Hounyovi Raïssa Ministère de l'éducation nationale

Chef de service et de projet Côte d'Ivoire

106. Mr. Inago Patrice Ministère de la Modernisation

Chef de Service Côte d'Ivoire

107. Mr. IRIE BI Guille Eric Noel RÉSEAU IVOIRIEN DE SUIVI ET ÉVALUATION

MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

108. Ms. JEMEA MAYON Christelle Chaire UNESCO Auditrice Côte d'Ivoire

27

109. Ms. Kablan Sowmah prisca carine

Ufhb Doctorante Côte d'Ivoire

110. Mr. KABORE Kouka Gret Responsable filière agricoles et suivi & Évaluation

Burkina Faso

111. Mr. kacou alex fabian snef service CI Charge d'affaire Côte d'Ivoire

112. Mr. KANE Alhassane PASA LOUMAKAF responsable Suivi Évaluation

Senegal

113. Mr. KANGA Penond Kouassi Serge Firmin

MTN CI Marketing Côte d'Ivoire

114. Mr. kassy yves anderson 3E SERVICES AFRIQUE FRANCOPHONE

Chargé d'études Côte d'Ivoire

115. Dr. KEITA Ibrahima Mamby District Sanitaire de Goudomp

Region Medicale de Sedhiou / Ministere de la Sante et de l'Action Sociale

Senegal

116. Mr. Koffi Alexandre ONG Change Human's Life

Assistant de projet Côte d'Ivoire

117. Ms. Koffi Amenan Kan Carine

AIESEC Vice présidente chargé des stages entrant

Côte d'Ivoire

118. Mr. KOFFI ATCHOLOU BAH N'GUESSAN ROLLAND

UNIVERSITE FELIX HOUPHOUET BOIGNY, ABIDJAN

ETUDIANT Côte d'Ivoire

119. Mr. KOFFI KOUAME BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

RESEAU IVOIRIEN DE SUIVI-EVALUATION

MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

120. Mr. koffi kouassi Conseil des jeunes du District d'Abidjan (COJEDA)

chargé de la communication et des TIC

Côte d'Ivoire

121. Ms. Koffi N'guessan Ange Jocelyne

Université Félix Houphouet Boigny Abidjan

Doctorante Côte d'Ivoire

122. Mr. KOFFI N'KOESSE PIERRE

ONG ELISABETH GLASER (EGPAF)

CHARGE SUIVI/EVALUATION

Côte d'Ivoire

123. Mr. Koffi Yao Francis Laboratoire d'analyse et de modélisation de politique économique

Étudiant Côte d'Ivoire

124. Mr. KOFFI ANTOINE N'GORAN AESA-UAO Chargé des Projets Côte d'Ivoire

125. Ms. KONAN Marie Eden Lee CHIC EXPRESS.ORG GERANTE Côte d'Ivoire

126. Mr. KONAN Max-Honnell Henri CABINET ILCA CONSEIL Conseiller Juridique Côte d'Ivoire

127. Mr. KONE aboubacar YOURS' CONSULTING Charge des affaires extérieures

Côte d'Ivoire

128. Mr. KONE Adama UNICEF Côte d'Ivoire Consultant en Suivi et évaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

129. Mr. KONE Amadou Ministere de la Sante et l'Hygiene Publique

ASSISTANT EN PASSATION DES MARCHES

Côte d'Ivoire

130. Mr. KONE Bema Drissa Ministère de la santé et de l'hygiène publique

Preparateur et Gestionnaire de Pharmacie

Côte d'Ivoire

131. Ms. KONE Nara Nitchiensy Sita

DCH Afrique Vice présidente Côte d'Ivoire

132. Mr. KOTIA Alexandre Willy Association Africaine de l'Eau (AAE)

Monitoring - Evaluation Assistant

Côte d'Ivoire

133. Ms. Kouadio Adjoa Emma Sylvie

Réseau ivoirien de suivi et évaluation (RISE)

Consultant_ EE ( point focal)

Côte d'Ivoire

134. Ms. KOUADIO AMENAN CHRISTINE

RESEAU IVOIRIEN DE SUIVI ET EVALUATION ( RISE)

MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

135. Mr. KOUADIO Brou Jeremie Office National de developpement de la riziculture

Chargé du Suivi Evaluation Côte d'Ivoire

136. Mr. KOUADIO COMOE JOACHIM

Agosoft-ci Suivi-Evaluateur Côte d'Ivoire

28

137. Mr. Kouadio Dongo Archange FORSCI CHARGÉ DE PROJET Côte d'Ivoire

138. Mr. kouadio franck nasser membre du groupe IDEV CONSULTANT Côte d'Ivoire

139. Ms. Kouadio Houphouet Ella Flavienne

Étudiante Licence 3 Côte d'Ivoire

140. Mr. KOUADIO KOUAKOU SYLVAIN

National Export Council (CNE)

HEAD OF Statistics and studies department

Côte d'Ivoire

141. Ms. kouadio songbré ange réseau Ivoirien de suivi et d'évaluation

nouvelle adhérant Côte d'Ivoire

142. Dr. KOUADIO KOUACOU

AKISSI NDJORE GHISLAINE

CONSULTANT INDEPENDANT

CONSULTANT INDEPENDANT

Côte d'Ivoire

143. Mr. KOUAKOU Brou Noel Task Force secteur Education/Formation

Appui Technique Côte d'Ivoire

144. Mr. Kouakou Jean Marc Palmafrique Chef d'ensemble Agro industriel

Côte d'Ivoire

145. Mr. KOUAKOU Kan Guy Roland RISE Consultant Côte d'Ivoire

146. Mr. KOUAKOU Kla Paulin Minitère de l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Scientifique

Chargé d'Etude Côte d'Ivoire

147. Mr. KOUAKOU KOUADIO ROMEO

IAAS Côte d'Ivoire Vice-président Côte d'Ivoire

148. Mr. KOUAKOU KOUAME YAMOI VENCESLAS

Centre Suisse de Recherches Scientifiques en Côte d'Ivoire (CSRS)

Chercheur-associé Côte d'Ivoire

149. Mr. KOUAKOU N'guessan Nicolas Réseau Ivoirien de Suivi et d'Evaluation (R.I.S.E)

Trésorier Adjoint Côte d'Ivoire

150. Mr. KOUAKOU Samuel Association Africaine d'Evaluation (AfrEA)

Vice-Président Côte d'Ivoire

151. Mr. Kouakou Cyriaque

KOUASSI Réseau Ivoirien de Suivi Evaluation (RISE)

MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

152. Mr. Kouame Fabrice ARSE Côte d'Ivoire Coordonateur de projet Côte d'Ivoire

153. Dr. KOUAME Koffi PRIMATURE / STP-CNN Responsable de Suivi et d'Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

154. Mr. KOUAME KOFFI NOEL AGENCE NATIONALE D'APPUI AU DEVELOPPEMENT RURAL ( ANADER)

CHEF DE SERVICE SUIVI EVALUATION ET QUALITE

Côte d'Ivoire

155. Mr. KOUAME KOUAME FULGENCE

MINISTÈRE DU PLAN ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT

INGÉNIEUR DES SCIENCES GÉOGRAPHIQUES ET TOPOGRAPHIQUES

Côte d'Ivoire

156. Dr. KOUAME Nestor PARCSI EXPERT EN SUIVI-EVALUATION

Côte d'Ivoire

157. Mr. KOUAO BREDOU JEAN-JACQUES

RISE MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

158. Ms. KOUAO Ekoua Krointchouwa Joséphine

PNUD/VNU chargeé de base de données

Côte d'Ivoire

159. Dr. Kouassi Aguié Boris RISE Membre actif Côte d'Ivoire

160. Mr. Kouassi Emmanuel Self-employment Independent Consultant - Program Development, Planning, MEL

Côte d'Ivoire

161. Mr. Kouassi Jean Hugues International Rescue Commettee

Coach Independant Côte d'Ivoire

162. Mr. Kouassi Joseph n'guessan COllègue djessou Enseignant Côte d'Ivoire

163. Mr. Kouassi Konan Fabrice Ambroise

THE REFERENCE CONSULTING GROUP

CONSULTANT Côte d'Ivoire

164. Mr. Kouassi Loukou Dominique

PAIA-ID, PDC-ID Expert en genre et développement

Côte d'Ivoire

29

165. Mrs. Kouassi épse Kouamé

Aya Nadège Chaire UNESCO, Université FHB Abidjan

Auditrice en Suivi-Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

166. Mr. KOUGNON HERVE DIDIER CENTRE DE SANTE, ZOE BRUNO

COMPTABLE Côte d'Ivoire

167. Mr. Koukoura Edmond

GNAMIEN Direction Générale Trésor, Compt. Publique

Expert Pôle-Dette Côte d'Ivoire

168. Mrs. Koulibaly épouse N'dry

Falana Mahoua Chaire Unesco Suivi-Evaluation Côte d'Ivoire

169. Mr. Kpatchi Medar Dakahimon Université Alassane Ouattara

Doctorant en Sociologie Côte d'Ivoire

170. Mrs. Kra Akoto Ettien Ella Mathilde

BNETD Chargée d'Etudes Côte d'Ivoire

171. Mr. Kramo Konan ange Frazier cyriack

Politiques économiques et modélisation (université Alassane Ouattara)

Auditeur Côte d'Ivoire

172. Mrs. LAGO Laura RISE Responsable groupe de travail: Travail Emploi et Protection Sociale

Côte d'Ivoire

173. Ms. Lalekou Ange ahïa la carolle

Université Alassane Ouattara

Master 2 économie de développement

Côte d'Ivoire

174. Ms. LASME Pascale Annick CONSEIL NATIONAL DES SPORTS

COMMISSION CHARGEE DE LA FORMATION

Côte d'Ivoire

175. Mr. LATHRO Meless Yves Bertrand

Office National de l'Eau Potable (ONEP)

chef de cellule gestion du patrimoine hydraulique

Côte d'Ivoire

176. Mr. LELLA-KONAN JULES ASSEMBLEE DES REGIONS ET DISTRICTS DE COTE D'IVOIRE

DIRECTEUR EXECUTIF Côte d'Ivoire

177. Mr. LIGNON Maxime Université Félix Houphouet Boigny Cocody Abidjan

Etudiant(DOCTORANT) Côte d'Ivoire

178. Mr. LITIE BALIET ADAMS Ministère de la Santé et de l'Hygiène Publique

Chargé d'étude Côte d'Ivoire

179. Mr. LOGBO Destin Abidjan Port / Port Autonome d'Abidjan

Head of IT Gouvernance Côte d'Ivoire

180. Ms. LOU ANGE ESTHER

IRIE ALIMENTATION POUR TOUS

PRESIDENTE Côte d'Ivoire

181. Dr. LOUKOU KONAN BENJAMIN

Ministère du Plan et du Développement

Ministère du Plan et du Développement

Côte d'Ivoire

182. Ms. M BOUKE MANDAN LAURETTE

ALIMENTATION POUR TOUS

VICE PRÉSIDENTE Côte d'Ivoire

183. Ms. Maatchi Raye Ntafam

Audrey Bureau National d'Etudes Techniques et de Développement

Chargée d'Etudes en Aménagement Rural

Côte d'Ivoire

184. Mr. Marciano Michel European Investment Bank Evaluation Expert Luxembourg

185. Mrs. Mballa Marielle Centre de recherche et d action pour la paix

Coordinatrice adjointe de projet

Côte d'Ivoire

186. Other Méa Jean-François MENETFP Inspecteur Côte d'Ivoire

187. Mr. MEDJIGBODO Marcellin Stratex Afrique Directeur Général Benin

188. Dr. MEL Saveur Paulin Université Chercheur Sociologue Côte d'Ivoire

189. Mr. MELEDJE DJEDJEMEL PACÔME DUVALIER

IAAS RESPONSABLE COMMUNICATION

Côte d'Ivoire

190. Ms. MÉLÈDJE Ayou Henriette Ange Korotoum

Traoré Bakari Consulting Juriste Côte d'Ivoire

191. Mr. Merouani Amar Cabinet dexpertise et de consulting

Directeur général Algeria

192. Dr. MOBIO ACHI MARIE DENISE

CENTRE INTEGRE DE RECHERCHES BIOCLINIQUES

CHEF DE SERVICE DE PEDIATRIE

Côte d'Ivoire

30

193. Mr. MORO KPANGNY JEAN JACQUES

YES GREEN EARTH RESPONSABLE BUDGET Côte d'Ivoire

194. Mr. MOUSSOUNDA MIKALA

André Richard Sénat Président de la Commission des Finances, du Budget et des Comptes Economiques de la Nation

Gabon

195. Mr. MUBENGA MUNDA

Henry RENECO Représentant Légal Adjoint Congo (Brazzaville)

196. Mr. NADOU LOBRY LOUIS PIERRE

LONACI DÉLÉGUÉ COMMERCIAL Côte d'Ivoire

197. Mr. NAHOUNOU BLE TRICKET APPOLINAIRE

Organisation pour le développement des activités des femmes (ODAFEM)

Chargé de Suivi / Evaluation Côte d'Ivoire

198. Dr. Nambo Pascal Kadja UFR Information communication et arts

enseignant chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

199. Mr. NAMOU Dékaï Jean-Luc Groupe Conseil Santé et Développement Sud

Consultant chargé d'études Côte d'Ivoire

200. Mr. NANGO Roméo SUPREME Compagny MANAGER Général Côte d'Ivoire

201. Mr. N'DJORE Youssouf World Cocoa Foundation Director of social Development, Country Director ai

Côte d'Ivoire

202. Ms. N'DOMAN AKICHI CARINE OLIVE

Chaire Unesco Auditrice suivi et évaluation de projets

Côte d'Ivoire

203. Mr. N'Douffou Jean Maison de la Société Civile du Centre/ CRASC Centre

Consultant Côte d'Ivoire

204. Mr. N'DRIN Morié Guy-Roland Centre Suisse de Recherche Scientifique en Côte d'Ivoire

Chercheurs associé Côte d'Ivoire

205. Mr. N'GBARAMOU JEAN-JACQUES ANDERSON

ONU FEMMES Chargé du suivi et évaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

206. Mr. NGUESSAN Sylvestre SOCIREP-CI Adjoint du Directeur Général Côte d'Ivoire

207. Mr. N'GUESSAN KOUASSI LAURENT

Réseau Ivoirien de Suivi et Evaluation (RISE)

MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

208. Mrs. NIABA Epse DIOP

yevi yolande MINISTERE DES SPORTS

stade Félix HOUPHOUET BOIGNY (PLATEAU)

Côte d'Ivoire

209. Mr. NIAMIEN Guy-Boris Donald AGOSOFT Suivi évaluateur Côte d'Ivoire

210. Mr. NOKPO ZIGNON ANDERSON

AGED-UFHB Sécrétaire à la planification Côte d'Ivoire

211. Mr. NOMBRÉ SAYBOU ONG JEUNES SOLIDAIRES

Abidan - Koumassi Remblais

Côte d'Ivoire

212. Mr. NOUAMAN Missa Salomon RISE Membre Côte d'Ivoire

213. Ms. NOUPLE YEO ONG ADDY MEMBRE Côte d'Ivoire

214. Mr. N'zi Désiré Cédric Bühler Group Project Director Côte d'Ivoire

215. Mr. oboumou sylvestre evrard kouassi

Chaire UNESCO-CHAIRE Cote d'Ivoire

Auditeur Développement Durable

Côte d'Ivoire

216. Mr. Olayanju Opeyemi Guaranty Trust Bank Relationship Manager (Back-up)

Nigeria

217. Other OMONON jean gildas romeo 2IEVAL 2IEVAL Côte d'Ivoire

218. Mr. ONAMBELE ONAMBELE

ALPHONSE MARIE

CONSEIL D'APPUI A LA REALISATION DES CONTRATS DE PARTENARIAT (CARPA) - CAMEROUN

EXPERT JURISTE N°1 Cameroon

219. Mr. OUATTARA ali ONG ACTIONS SOCIALES POUR LA PAIX

Directeur Exécutif Côte d'Ivoire

31

220. Mrs. Ouattara Amissatou ramata Ministère de la santé et de l'hygiène publique

Assistant passation de marchés publics

Côte d'Ivoire

221. Mrs. OUATTARA Marie-Antoinette Ministère du Plan et du développement - DCSIG

Directeur DCSIG Côte d'Ivoire

222. Prof. OUATTARA Wautabouna Ministère de l'Intégration Africaine et des Ivoiriens de l'Extérieur

Directeur Général de l'Intégration Africaine

Côte d'Ivoire

223. Mrs. Ouattara Epse Coulibaly

Yagnama Rokia Centre de Recherche en Ecologie

Chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

224. Mr. OUGA BI VOLE GASTON

ONG Union Internationale pour la Fraternité et la Solidarité

Président du Conseil d'Administration

Côte d'Ivoire

225. Ms. oulato charlotte Droits des enfants en Cote d'Ivoire (DECI)

stagiaire Côte d'Ivoire

226. Mr. oumar coulibaly ministere de la santéet de l'hygiene publique

chargé d'etudes Côte d'Ivoire

227. Mr. OURA Kouadio Micaël BRLI-CI Assistant sociologue Côte d'Ivoire

228. Mr. OUREGUEHI CHARLES ALIMENTATION POUR TOUS

CHARGE DE COMMUNICATION

Côte d'Ivoire

229. Mr. OVI Missidjé Jean-Claude

RIDDEF Chargé de Communication Côte d'Ivoire

230. Mrs. Pauline Gemdjo MINTP Ingénieur Cameroon

231. Mr. PEPE Gbalé Richard Office National d’Identification

Directeur des Opérations Côte d'Ivoire

232. Mrs. Picard Louise École nationale d'administration publique

Coordonnatrice du PIFED Canada

233. Ms. Rabe Grace deborah BtoB MARKET Abidjan Côte d'Ivoire

234. Mr. ramde roger université de cocody abidjan

ecole doctorale de l'ufr sciences economiques et de gestion

Côte d'Ivoire

235. Mr. SECK Papa Demba bureau d'études & d'évaluation

Directeur Général Senegal

236. Ms. Sedji Arlette Stéphanie Société coopérative agricole de café cacao anacadre

DIRECTRICE Côte d'Ivoire

237. Ms. SILUE Clémentine CENTRE RÉGIONAL D'APPUI À LA SOCIÉTÉ CIVILE DU NORD (CRASC-NORD)

Responsable Exécutive Côte d'Ivoire

238. Mr. Smithson Edward UK Dept for International Development

Evaluation Adviser, DFID Nigeria

Nigeria

239. Mrs. Sobo Avoaka Monique Association Africaine de l'Eau

Responsable du Suivi et Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

240. Ms. SORO Djata Tchapégué APDH-BOUAKE Présidente Côte d'Ivoire

241. Mrs. Soumahoro Fanta Réseau ivoirien de Suivi Evalua5

Responsable thématique Éducation formation

Côte d'Ivoire

242. Mr. Sove Gogbe Aubin Universal technologie ( unitec )

Coordonnateur régional de projet

Côte d'Ivoire

243. Mr. SYLLA Aboubakari Cabinet de Consultance Internationale en Économie Sociale et Solidaire

Consultant Manager Général

Côte d'Ivoire

244. Mr. TALL Fousseni CLUCOD Secrétaire Général du Conseil Exécutif

Côte d'Ivoire

245. Mr. TAMBOURA HASSAN BOAD CHEF DIVISION Togo

246. Mr. TANMANTCHIN BRICE-WILFRIED

OUATTARA AIESEC Membre Côte d'Ivoire

247. Ms. Tanoh Affoué Ghislaine Manuela

CIRES Assistance de recherche Côte d'Ivoire

32

248. Mr. Tanoh Bienvenue Beugré ADEACI Président Côte d'Ivoire

249. Mr. TANOH Ouattara Issouf Chaire Unesco de l'Université FHB

Doctorant en Gestion des projets

Côte d'Ivoire

250. Mr. TANOH-NIANGOIN

Fréderic ONG ALERTE CONFLIT Président Côte d'Ivoire

251. Dr. Tarsilla Michele UNICEF Regional Office , West and Central Africa

Regional Evaluation Adviser Senegal

252. Mr. TAYORO Euloge RISE (Réseau Ivoirien du Suivi Évaluation)

Membre Côte d'Ivoire

253. Mrs. Tchokokam Coulibaly

Vénus You-Consult Associée Côte d'Ivoire

254. Mr. TEDJI Yves Eric Chaire UNESCO-CHAIRE Cote d'Ivoire

Suivi-Evaluation Côte d'Ivoire

255. Ms. TEHOUA LAZARE UNIVERSITE PELEFORO GON COULIBALY KORHOGO

MEMBRE DU CONSEIL D'UNIVERSITE

Côte d'Ivoire

256. Mrs. TEHOUA YAO Karidja RISE POINT FOCAL ÉVALUATEUR ÉMERGENT

Côte d'Ivoire

257. Mr. TIEHI DEROU LAURENT

ONG ESPOIR HANDICA DIRECTEUR EXECUTIF Côte d'Ivoire

258. Mr. Tikouaï Tanguy Ninsemou REVILA Ministre de la Mobilisation adjoint II

Côte d'Ivoire

259. Ms. TOH YOU ZEREGO PASCALINE NADEGE

CHAIRE UNESCO SUIVI EVALUATEUR Côte d'Ivoire

260. Mr. TOLLA Kouassi Ismael Observatoire Ivoirien pour la Gestion Durable des Ressources Naturelles (OI-REN)

Chargé de Projets Côte d'Ivoire

261. Mr. TRAORE ISMAILA JVCI(JEUNES VOLONTAIRES DE LA COTE D'IVOIRE)

VICE-PRESIDENT Côte d'Ivoire

262. Mr. TRAORE Namblé FOXTROT INTERNATIONAL

Responsable Achats Côte d'Ivoire

263. Mr. TRAORE YAYA COUR PENALE INTERNATIONALE

CHEF DE PARC AUTO Côte d'Ivoire

264. Mr. Traoré Ibrahima Réseau ivoirien de suivi et évaluation (RISE)

Abidjan Côte d'Ivoire

265. Ms. Trazie Monique Abigael Saoua

Association Solidarité Handicap Côte d'Ivoire

Présidente section bonoua Côte d'Ivoire

266. Ms. Tro Marina The HALO Trust office manager Côte d'Ivoire

267. Mr. Vroh Michel ange Adeaci Secrétaire général Côte d'Ivoire

268. Dr. WARINDA ENOCK ASARECA Theme Leader - M&E and Knowledge Management

Uganda

269. Mr. Williams Auguste junior

Diecket Yes Green Earth Chargé de renforcement des capacités

Côte d'Ivoire

270. Ms. Yaka Ahou Adeline ONU FEMMES Côte d'Ivoire

Stagiaire en Suivi Evaluation

Côte d'Ivoire

271. Mr. YAO HOUPHOUET DIEUDONNE

SANTE COMMUNAUTAIRE

GESTIONNAIRE Côte d'Ivoire

272. Mr. YAO Kouadio Maurice RISE Membre Côte d'Ivoire

273. Mr. YAO MOISE THEODORE

MEDIA FOR CHANGE SECRETAIRE EXECUTIF Côte d'Ivoire

274. Mrs. YAO-KOUMAN Angela Société générale Financial Analyst

275. Mr. YAPI Guy-Assane Groupe Fraternité Matin Journaliste Côte d'Ivoire

276. Mr. YAPO ANDOH REGIS VIANNEY

Centre de Recherche microéconomie du

Assistant chercheur Côte d'Ivoire

33

développement (CREMIDE)

277. Ms. yoboue evelyne armelle société civile membre Côte d'Ivoire

278. Mr. YOBOUET SIMPLICE Ministère de l’Education Nationale de l’Enseignement Technique et de la Formation Professionnelle (MENET-FP)

Chef de Service Projets / Programme à la Direction des Stratégies, de la Planification et des Statistiques (DSPS)

Côte d'Ivoire

279. Mr. YODA MAMADOU COMITE NATIONAL -MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION (MCC)

EXPERT SUIVI-EVALUATION

Côte d'Ivoire

280. Mr. ZAGLO ZIBOH FELICITE ONG CLUCOD-CLUB UNIVERSITAIRE

SUIVI-EVALUATEUR Côte d'Ivoire

281. Ms. ZALO Elodie Agence Emploi Jeunes Sous-Directrice des Etudes et des Statistiques

Côte d'Ivoire

282. Mr. ZAMBLE BI GHISLAIN ISIDORE KEVIN

CHAIRE UNESCO DE COCODY

ETUDIANT Côte d'Ivoire

283. Dr. ZOHORE Togba Gagui UFHB d'ABIDJAN ABIDJAN COCODY Côte d'Ivoire

284. Mr. ZOMBO Jean Philippe Université Félix Houphouet Boigny

Etudiant ( Doctorat ) Côte d'Ivoire

285. Mr. ZOMBOU NGOUNE

Marcel Ministère des Petites et Moyennes Entreprises, de l'économie Sociale et de l'Artisanat

Chef de Service des Enquêtes et Statistiques

Cameroon

286. Mr. ZORE MAMBO KEVIN HERVE

Association pour l'Aide aux Jeunes Ivoiriens a la Recherche d'Emploi et de Formation (AJIREF)

Vice-President Emploi Côte d'Ivoire

287.

288. Mr. MOUBARAK LO Senegal

289. DOGO Pierre Côte d'Ivoire

290. AWUTEY Komla Junior Côte d'Ivoire

291. Mr. KOFFI Eric Côte d'Ivoire

292. SOUME Norah Dash Côte d'Ivoire

293. KOUAKOU Daniel Frank Aime Côte d'Ivoire

294. OUATTARA Lakoun A Actualiser Côte d'Ivoire

295. TURAY Foday AFDB Côte d'Ivoire

296. Mme NEGA Eskedge UNECA Ethiopia

297. Mr. ISSO Sylla

298. Mr. ABDOUL Kholeke

299. Camara Moustuce France

300. MBASSA Ndine

301. FIRMBOBO Fello Italy

302. YAO Koffi Simplice Côte d'Ivoire

34

Annex 3: List of Rapporteurs

SESSION RAPPORTEURS KNOWLEDGE CAFÉ 05 SEPTEMBER 2018 at CCIA TIME: 9:00AM-12:00PM

1. Mohamed Coulibaly

2. Boubacar Ly

3. Latefa Camara

4. Najade Lindsay

5. Gilbert Adjimoti

6. Brenda Tautsagae

GENDER WORKSHOP 05 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 8:30AM-3:00PM

1. Stephanie Yoboue 2. Samson Houetohossou

OECD-DAC CRITERIA DISCUSSION 05 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 3:00 – 5:00PM

1. Aminata Kouma 2. Eric Yai

OPENING SESSION 06 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 10:00AM-12:30PM

1. Telesphore Some 2. Latefa Camara

PPPs FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 06 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 2:00PM-5:30PM

1. Daniel Alonso 2. Boubacar Ly 3. Brenda Tautsagae

INCLUSION THROUGH AGRICULTURE 07 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 9:00AM-12:30PM

1. Eric Yai 2. Gilbert Adjimoti

PARTNERSHIPS FOR IMPACT IN AFRICA 07 SEPTEMBER 2018 at HQ TIME: 2:00pm-4:30PM

1. Kobena Hanson 2. Aminata Kouma