Date post: | 04-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | baldwin-riley |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Role of Evaluation Units in fulfilling Evaluation Mandate
1
Pre-Conference for the International Year of Evaluation 2015Swiss Evaluation Society (SEVAL) / Geneva Evaluation Network (GEN)
Chaitali Chattopadhyay, WSSCC
Presentation Structure
I. WSSCC and its Evaluation Theory of Change
I. Case Study-Sanitation and Hygiene Thematic Window in partnership with International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie)
II. WSSCC Evaluation role/functions: Reflections and way forward
2
3
• Founded in 1990 by the UN General Assembly resolution
• A global, multi-stakeholder membership and partnership organization
• Works with poor & marginalized people, their organizations, governments to improve sanitation and hygiene at scale
• A membership of over 3000 water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) professionals from over 130 countries
• Governed by a Steering Committee of elected members from the membership constituency
• Hosted by the United Nations (WHO until 2009 and UNOPS since 2010)
• WSSCC’s main corporate priorities: Equality and Non-discrimination and Access and Use at scale.
Guiding principles
Spirit of collaboration,
facilitator & brokering a
collective leadership, neutral player
Policy advocacy, voices of people, justice, human
rights, most vulnerable and
marginalised people
4
WSSCC Organogram
5
6
Where do we work
A multi-stakeholder environment
Evaluation Mandate: The Theory of Change
Organizational and Sectoral learning-central to the Evaluation function
Accountability for the results
Committed in this MTSP
8
Evaluation: the journey so far…
Period covering 2000-2004 2005-2011 2012-2016
Raison d'être Corporate performance,
relevance, value for money assessment
Corporate performance, relevance, value for money assessment
Sector contribution, sector learning center stage , Policy
influencing plans, multi-sectoral approach, minimize
duplication
Evaluation Mandate
Donor sponsored Donor sponsored WSSCC /Organization driven
Funding support Donors Donors Embedded in the organisational budget
External quality assurance
mechanisms
No No Peer review/advisory mechanisms in place
Nature of Evaluation
External Evaluation External Evaluation External Evaluation (s)
Evaluation structure,
dedicated HR
No separate M&E unit No separate M&E unit Dedicated M&E unit 2 full time technical staff under
the NKM PM
9
Quick facts
10
Structure Not an independent Evaluation Office/ stand-alone Co-located- Networking, Knowledge Management Dept.
Maturity Relatively nascent, the M&E Unit- 2013
Policy Framework UNEG institutional partner, Not a full member No organizational Evaluation Policy
Eval Staff versus total organizational staff
Two full-time staff, NKM Programme Manager versus 41 staff
Monitoring and Evaluation functions
Still within the same unit, likely to be separated
Budget in the current MTSP
1% of overall organizational budget
How can we contribute towards an evidence- based culture and practice?
How can we go beyond the WASH Sector and make it a multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral learning and enriching experience ?
Can we strengthen monitoring and evaluation of advocacy and policy influencing?
Process should be as important as the evidence
How can we contribute meaningfully towards the International Year of Evaluation?
11
Case study: The sanitation and hygiene thematic window for impact Evaluation
WSSCC & 3IE: A unique/complementary partnership
WSSCC
Global membership organization, spirit of collaboration, facilitator & brokering a collective leadership, Policy advocacy, voices of people and experience of managing a Global fund for sanitation and hygiene
3IE
Mandate to generate high-quality evidence to deliver better policies and program in order to improve lives
Cutting-edge technical expertise
Developing country focused grant portfolio
12
Evaluation Advisory Committee
Multi-disciplinary experts- Evaluation, WASH, Health/Reproductive health, Academia/ Research, Donor constituency
Provide technical support, minimise duplication, inter-agency collaboration, learning and sharing to collectively influence an evidence-building culture
Who are they?
13
Sam Bickle
UNICEF
Andrea E Cook
UNFPA
Dr Pavani Ram
Univ of Buffalo
Dr Bertha
Briceno, IADB
Johan Sundberg
SIDA
Impact Evaluations (2) Systematic Reviews (2)
Evaluating advocacy approaches in development
WSSCC Mid Term Review (MTR)
FACETS OF WORK
14
Features/strengths
Equity and Gender- Evaluation team composition
Independence with inclusion – Senior management in safeguarding independence
– process important- enhancing stakeholder involvement in evaluation
Utilization focused, results into action, management response
15
Ground realities…
• Evolving evaluation culture
• Limited systems of monitoring and data quality assurance
• Nearly 50% of our programmes do not have conventional results framework/log frame- challenging the evaluability
• Oversight/ management functions along with the core evaluation function
16
Forward looking vision
Member state driven- rather than agency driven- putting principles of aid effectiveness at the center-stage
Multi-agency/multi-sectoral learning, avoid duplication
Increase in joint evaluations
Use of evaluation to support evidence-based policy and decision-making
National evaluation capacity development- member states and the local governance level 17
What does this mean for WSSCC?
• Accountability for whom?
• Investing in evidence building
• Applying evidence to its own work
• Preparing for change/ Reinvigorating itself
18
THANK YOU
19