Evaluation Methods / Méthodes d'évaluation

Permanent URI for this community

https://hdl.handle.net/10625/47199

Browse

Now showing 1 - 20 of 94

Maximizing the Benefits of Self-Assessment: Tools and Tips
(1998) Smutylo, Terry; Lusthaus, Charles
Gender evaluation methodology for internet and ICTs : a learning tool for change and empowerment
(Association for Progressive Communications (APC), Melville, ZA, 2005) Ramilo, Chat Garcia; Cinco, Cheekay
Assessing organizational performance : self-help kit
(2007)
Assessing Organizational Performance - Level 1- International Development Research Centre
(2007-03) Rojas, Katrina; Lusthaus, Charles
The evaluation framework is able to reflect how well an organization carries out programming work, as well as how its various systems and resources provide organizational capacity that supports performance. Performance is defined in terms of effectiveness (mission fulfilment), efficiency, ongoing relevance (the extent to which the organization adapts to changing conditions in its environment), and financial viability. The evaluation method acknowledges the context /factors that facilitate or impede performance capacity. The presentation provides a framework and learning module for the organizational assessment process.
Accountability principles for research organisations
(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, Brendan
The book encompasses motivations for organisational accountability, drawing on four central principles of: participation, evaluation, transparency, and feedback. It explores the tensions and constraints facing different types of organisations. For research organisations, it describes key stakeholders who should be consulted; it reviews key methods which will enable a research organisation to be more accountable, and discusses practical issues and tensions in their implementation. The study develops an ‘ideal’ holistic set of principles for accountability based on principles and arguments of effectiveness, both the normative and instrumental justifications for accountability.
Accountability principles for research organisations : a framework to understand and implement accountability good practices for research organisations working in developing countries; executive summary
(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, Brendan
Accountability principles for research organisations : toolkit
(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, Brendan
SAS2 : a guide to collaborative inquiry and social engagement
(IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2008) Chevalier, Jacques M.; Buckles, Daniel J.
SAS2: A Guide to Collaborative Inquiry and Social Engagement represents a significant international effort to support the creation and mobilization of practical, authentic knowledge for social change. The guiding principle behind SAS2 (Social Analysis Systems, www.sas2.net) is that group dialogue and social inquiry are crucial for local and global development. Social issues must be addressed socially and in a multistakeholder mode, not by private interests and experts alone, and the insights that emerge fully integrated into processes of knowledge production, planning, and decision-making. Part 1 outlines the concepts and skillful means needed to support multistakeholder dialogue. It also provides detailed instructions on how to integrate and ground collaborative inquiry in the projects, plans, evaluations and activities of multiple stakeholders. Part 2 presents a selection of techniques for collaborative inquiry and examples of real-life applications in South Asia and Latin America. The examples focus on a range of issues including land tenure, local economic development, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and organizational development. This book will be an invaluable resource for researchers, facilitators and activists working with people to solve problems and support inclusive inquiry and decision-making. It will also be useful to scholars and academics studying and teaching participatory action research in the Social Sciences.
Accountability Principles for Research Institutes: On-line Forum Report, Feb-Mar 2008
(2008) Whitty, Brendan
The on-line forum which invited responses to the questions: (1) To whom are research organisations in developing countries accountable? (2) What is the nature of their accountability? This paper summarises the responses to the questions. The forum participants drew on their own experience and that of their research to propose the existence of a number of “ideal types” of research organisation, each of which has its own stakeholder profile. Acknowledging, however, that the diversity of research organisations defies easy classification, the participants teased out some of the dilemmas facing research organisations in defining and balancing the demands and level of engagement to different groups of stakeholders. They also proposed accountability mechanisms and approaches by which research organisations can best resolve these dilemmas.
Stretched in all directions: The demands, pulls and pressures acting on policy research organisations
(2008-01) Whitty, Brendan
This paper introduces some of the common demands and accountability relationships placed on policy-relevant research organisations, such as university research centres, think tanks, human rights organizations and others. The project explored policy communities working in the fields of agricultural science and governance in three countries: India, the Philippines, and Kenya. It questions and explores who generates information used for policy decision-making in developing countries, what demands are made on them, and by which stakeholders.
Who do you work for? Establishing a better match between justifications of research and effective accountability to claimed beneficiaries
(2008-05) Johnson, Carolina; Whitty, Brendan; Hammer, Michael
Evidence based policy making relies on sound research. Yet while the policy making processes are themselves increasingly under scrutiny, little work has been done so far on the accountability of the research organisations that significantly inform and influence public policy. This paper explores the accountability of research organisations from all sectors triggered by their claims to work on behalf of particular groups of beneficiaries, and the challenges to operationalise these in a way that is meaningful to the people eventually affected by the policy implications of the research. It finishes by challenging those organisations that claim to work on behalf of very widely defined, hard-to-identify or inaccessible constituencies to be more rigorous and transparent about the way they propose to engage with these groups. The aim of this work is to help address accountability gaps that may harm the legitimacy of important research and the validity of its results, reducing the overall impact and effectiveness of a wide range of research organisations, including from civil society, in the public policy process.
SAS2 : guía para la investigación colaborativa y la movilización social
(CIID, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2009) Chevalier, Jacques M.; Buckles, Daniel J.
SAS2: Guía para la Investigación Colaborativa y la Movilización Social representa un esfuerzo internacional significativo en apoyo a la creación y movilización de conocimiento práctico auténtico que propicie el cambio social. El principio subyacente a SAS2 (Social Analysis Systems, www.sas2.net) es que el diálogo de grupo y la investigación social son cruciales para el desarrollo local y mundial. Las problemáticas sociales se deben abordar socialmente en función multiarea, no sólo entre intereses privados y expertos y las ideas que surjan se deben integrar plenamente a los procesos de producción del conocimiento, planificación y toma de decisiones. La Parte 1 esboza los conceptos y los medios hábiles necesarios para sustentar el diálogo de las múltiples partes interesadas. También entrega instrucciones detalladas sobre cómo integrar y consolidar la investigación colaborativa en los proyectos, planes, evaluaciones y actividades de numerosas partes interesadas. La Parte 2 presenta una selección de técnicas para la investigación colaborativa y ejemplos de aplicaciones reales en Asia del Sur y América Latina. Los ejemplos se centran en una gama de temáticas como tenencia de la tierra, desarrollo económico local, agricultura, silvicultura, pesca y desarrollo organizacional. Esta obra será un valioso recurso para investigadores, facilitadores y activistas que trabajan con la gente para resolver problemas y prestar apoyo a la investigación y toma de decisiones incluyentes. También será de utilidad para académicos y docentes que estudian y enseñan investigación-acción participativa en las Ciencias Sociales.
Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO), phase II : putting the principles into practice
(One World Trust, London, GB, 2009) One World Trust
This one-page brief outlines the objectives of Accountability Principles for Research Organizations (APRO) to improve the accountability of research organisations working in developing countries. This can be achieved by testing practical processes and tools derived from the first phase of APRO, building their credibility, and disseminating them amongst research organisations thereby facilitating their uptake. The first phase of APRO formulated a framework which views accountability through four key principles: transparency, participation, evaluation and feedback management.
SAS2 : guide sur la recherche collaborative et l'engagement social
(CRDI, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2009) Chevalier, Jacques M.; Buckles, Daniel J.
SAS2 : Guide sur la recherche collaborative et l’engagement social fait état d’une collaboration internationale qui innove au chapitre de la création et la mobilisation d’un savoir pratique et authentique et sa mise au service du changement social. Les Systèmes d’analyse sociale (SAS2, www.sas2.net) partent du principe que le dialogue et la recherche sociale sont au coeur du développement tant local que mondial. Ils posent que les enjeux sociaux doivent être abordés dans une démarche sociale et multipartite, et non pas uniquement par des intérêts privés et des spécialistes, dans l’espoir que les insights qui en découlent soient pleinement intégrés aux mécanismes de production du savoir, de planification et de prise de décision. La première partie du Guide énonce les concepts et les « moyens habiles » qui fondent le dialogue et l’engagement social. On y trouve également des directives détaillées sur la façon d’intégrer et d’ancrer la recherche collaborative dans les projets, les plans, les évaluations et les activités impliquant une pluralité d’acteurs et d’intervenants. La deuxième partie présente une sélection de techniques de recherche collaborative et des exemples d’application en Asie du Sud et en Amérique latine, dans des domaines aussi variés que les régimes fonciers, le développement économique local, l’agriculture, la foresterie, les pêches et le développement organisationnel. Ce livre sera d’une très grande utilité pour les chercheurs, les animateurs et les intervenants qui oeuvrent à la résolution de problème en appuyant des modes de recherche et de prise de décision participatifs. Ce livre sera également utile aux chercheurs et aux enseignants universitaires qui pratiquent et enseignent la recherche-action collaborative en sciences sociales.
Accountable lobbying of Parliament - A reaction to the Select Committee Report on Lobbying in Whitehall; supporting transparency and limiting opportunity for inappropriate lobbying
(2009-01) Whitty, Brendan
Facilitators guide for GEM workshops
(Association for Progressive Communications (APC), Melville, ZA, 2010) Angela M. Kuga Thas; Chat Garcia Ramilo; Dafne Sabanes Plou
Gender evaluation methodology (GEM) for Internet and ICTs was begun in 2001 for development practitioners in 25 countries from Latin America, Asia, Africa and Central and Eastern Europe. This facilitators guide is a complementary guide to the GEM ICTs manual published in 2005. The new suite of publications that accompany the manual are based on years of experience in facilitating GEM workshops in many countries. Though GEM was initially developed for evaluating and planning projects using ICTs, experience demonstrates that GEM can be used generally.
Accountability of Innovation - A literature review, framework and guidelines to strengthen accountability of organisations engaged in technological innovation
(2010-02) Whitty, Brendan; Gersten, Julie; Poskakukhina, Yulia
Technological advances in fields such as health care, food security and clean energy offer vital solutions to the chronic problems facing human society today. Innovation is a key element of progress and improvement in the quality of life of people across the world. Yet since the Second World War there has been a significant change in the understanding of how technological innovation happens, and how technological innovation in different sectors can be improved. Literature and practice reveals in particular a growing awareness of the need when innovating to take into account a wider group of stakeholders, including the users, as well as a range of social, economic and cultural factors. It is vital therefore to be much more widely accountable and responsive. This paper synthesises some of the most important lessons learned arising from this new understanding of innovation, and provides a framework of accountability for organisations engaged in technological research and development. The guidelines focus on supporting organisations to become more effective, while simultaneously ensuring that they adhere to ethical standards in their innovation. Working towards principles of accountability in the innovation process including engagement with external stakeholders, evaluation, and communicating with them, helps to ensure their ongoing cooperation, acceptance and productive use of often complex technological and scientific innovations beyond the narrow group of experts. Starting from a literature review, the paper presents a set of guidelines which are designed to assist a research manager reflect on their accountability. It provides options and principles, rooted in the literature, which can help them address the processes and consider organisational change. The briefing paper is accordingly split into three main parts. The first articulates a theory of accountability, distinguishing between accountability which serves an ethical purpose and accountability which makes an organisation more effective. The second covers the literature addressing the new understanding of innovation, and analyses it for the relevance to accountability. The third part offers a set of guidelines, structured around distinct processes common to most organisations – strategic planning, project identification and design, conducting the research, and then concluding the research process.
Accountability framework for technological innovation
(2010-02) Whitty, Brendan
To become accountable, research managers of organizations conducting R&D must identify and balance the interests of a range of stakeholders. This brief identifies paths and strategies to guide research managers through difficult decisions. Accountability processes need to be embedded in day-to-day functioning and the culture of the organization. Researchers face multiple tensions and choices: whose interests are priorities? What is relevant to the beneficiaries? Are donor agendas aligned with the beneficiaries and/or the researchers organizations? This brief aims to analyze frameworks for accountability and addresses important how-to questions.
Addressing accountability in NGO advocacy: Practice, principles and prospects of self-regulation
(2010-03) Hammer, Michael; Rooney, Charlotte; Warren, Shana
Based on a world-wide survey of civil society self-regulatory initiatives, this paper examines how non-governmental organizations (NGO) have begun to address the accountability challenges they face when engaging in advocacy, and explains some of the strengths and weaknesses of existing self-regulation. The briefing identifies a set of initial good practice principles for advocacy organisations for each major dimension of accountability. Questions and concerns about whether an organisation indeed contributes to the public benefit have often been confused with the issue of how to assess and measure the impact of particular policy advocacy activities.
Gender analysis for ICT localisation initiatives
(Association for Progressive Communications (APC), Melville, ZA, 2011) Angela M. Kuga Thas; Chat Garcia Ramilo
Localisation of ICT is the process of adapting and customising software so that a specific community or locale can use it. The Gender Analysis for ICT Localisation Initiatives guide reflects the collective lessons of localisation initiatives in Asia which used Association for Progressive Communication (APC) Gender Evaluation Methodology for Internet and ICTs (GEM) to strengthen their gender perspective in project planning, monitoring and evaluation. Without a gender analysis, and without taking into account gender considerations in the development and deployment of technological infrastructure and software, including the effects of past and current discriminatory practices, localisation initiatives could widen the digital gap between women and men.

Browse

Browsing Evaluation Methods / Méthodes d'évaluation by Issue Date

Results Per Page

Sort Options