CGIAR Evaluation Community of Practice Workshop

The CGIAR evaluation function: Progress so far and where does this feed into?

September

2014

CGIAR Evaluation Strategic Objective

Ensuring that the evaluation function is a key and effective instrument of accountability and learning, fully contributing to the shaping and vision of the future CGIAR

IEA = Who We Are

• CGIAR system entity: small unit based in FAO

• Reports to Fund Council through biannual meetings and Evaluation and Impact Assessment Committee (EIAC)

• Operates in close consultation with Consortium Office

• Works closely with Centers/CRPs

• Collaborates with ISPC, including SPIA

How IEA fits into to CGIAR

IEA – Reviews & Evaluations1 CRP

evaluation completed

+ Mgmt Response

Forests, Trees & Agroforestry

2 Reviews

completed

+ Mgmt Response

CRP Governance

& Management

Generation Challenge Program

4 ongoing CRP

evaluations (TORs/IRs):

PIM

AAS

WHEAT

MAIZE

5 CRP evaluations

in planning and preparatory work

(TORs):

CCAFS

GRISP

L&F

RTB

WLE

CRP- Commissioned Evaluations• IEA structured support on quality assurance

to 5 CRP Commissioned Evaluations (requested by FC) :

– Dryland Cereals, Dryland Systems, Grain Legumes, A4NH, and HumidTropics

• IEA support and guidance to CCEEs:

– On-demand basis (planning, selection of consultants, TORs, evaluation governance)

– Extensive use of IEA standards and guidance notes

IEA Evaluations– timeline 2013 2014 2015 2016

Policies, Institutions & Markets

Forests, Trees and Agroforestry

Wheat

Maize

Aquatic Agricultural Systems

Roots, Tubers, and Bananas

Livestock and Fish

Climate Change, Agri & Food Security

Water, Land and Ecosystems

Global Rice Science Partnership

QA Support to 5 CRPS: Dryland Systems, DrylandCereals, Grain Legumes, A4NH, and Humidtropics

For Whom/ What Purpose? CRP Management

• Learning for strategic management and adaptations and adjustments of program

• Preparation: 2nd cycle of CRP proposals

System-wide

• System wide strategic management (MTR, SRF, 2nd call for funding)

• Resource for system-wide evaluation

Donors

• Accountability on program performance

• Building trust and transparency

• Strategic and informed decisions on portfolio and funding allocations

Partners

• Build trust and transparency

• Accountability on partnership and program performance

• Refinement of partnership

Evaluation

System-level reviews – mid-term review

Examine the progress of the CGIAR reforms, and the resulting appropriateness, effectiveness, and efficiency of the overall system and make recommendations for course correction and improvements where necessary.

Commissioned by: Fund Council

Evaluators: Independent Panel

Timeline: Results of the review and final recommendations will be discussed/adopted at the forthcoming Fund Council meeting for Year 2014.

Links: TORs and Inception report (April 2014)

CRP extensions and 2nd call for proposals

Consortium Board and Fund Council decision:

• Extend (and refresh) the current CRPs to the end of 2016 (with Extension proposals for 2015-16 in 2014);

• Develop proposals for the second stage with the benefit of the conclusions and recommendations of both the Mid-term Review of the Reform, and forms of external evaluation for all CRPs.

CRP 2nd call for proposals: process

• March 2015: CRPs submit Pre-Proposals on-line.

• July - September 2015: Review by CO and ISPC and CRPs submit revised proposals

• November 2015: CB and FC determine which proposals, and/or key components, are to be developed into full proposals

• March 2016: invited CRPs submit Full Proposals

• April - September 2016: six months for ISPC, CO, and FO and to review the proposals

• September 2016: A full set of (a) CRP proposals; (b) ISPC reviews; and (c) CO FO, IEA evaluations available for review and feedback from CB and FC members

• November 2016: CB and FC complete funding /approval decisions

Scope of CRP Evaluation

Broad scope: Relevance, QoS, Effectiveness, impacts, sustainability, efficiency

Summative

– Results of past research which is continuing in CRP

Formative

– Programmatic approach in enhancing relevance and efficiency of CRP

– Likelihood of effectiveness to contribute to SRF vision, SLOs and outcomes

Monitoring and impact assessment feed into evaluation

Uptake,InfluenceAdoptionOutcomes

SPIA

InputsProgress

CRP

E V A L U A T I O N

Impact

Outputs

Current research- 4-8 years- 5-10 years- 10-20 years

Some challenges

• The evaluand: is a moving target: several iterations of structural changes since the initial proposal

• Monitoring and Evaluation capacity and systems uneven across CGIAR – The “building blocks” are not there

• No clear accountability and learning framework at CRP and system levels

The role of the Evaluation Community

of Practice in meeting our strategic

objective

• Strengthen the culture of evaluation across CGIAR

• Network and share information

• Build capacity and strengthen coordinated planning and cooperation

• Strengthen the collective voice of evaluation in the system

At CRP

level:

Evaluation

building

blocks

Blue-internal,

Green – external

P- research project level

Sub – sub themes &

components

THEMES AND CROSS-CUTTING

S

U

B

S

U

B

S

U

B

S

U

B

S

U

B

S

U

B

P

P

PPP P P PP

P P

PPP

P PP

P

P

PPPPPP

P P PPPPP

P P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P P

P P P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

MONITORING INPUTS AND INDICATORS