Evaluation / Évaluation
Permanent URI for this community
Evaluation for development
Evaluation is integral to IDRC’s work. It forms an important part of the evidence base for understanding how research contributes to solving development problems.
IDRC strives to be an accountable learning organization by conducting formal evaluation studies and integrating a culture of “evaluative thinking” into its activities.
Evaluative thinking involves:
- being results-oriented, reflective, and questioning,
- being able to articulate values,
- using evidence to test assumptions.
IDRC has developed a robust and decentralized evaluation system that meets the multifaceted needs of our mandate, structure, and programming model. Evaluation is a shared responsibility and takes place throughout IDRC at the project, program, and corporate levels.
L’évaluation au service du développement
L’évaluation fait partie intégrante des activités du CRDI et contribue de façon importante à l’assise de données qui permet de comprendre l'apport de la recherche à la résolution des problèmes en matière de développement.
Le CRDI est axé sur l’apprentissage et la reddition de comptes; par conséquent, il voit à la réalisation d’évaluations en bonne et due forme et il cherche à instaurer une culture où la « pensée évaluative » imprègne toutes les activités.
La pensée évaluative va de pair avec:
- l’importance accordée aux résultats, à la réflexion et à la remise en question,
- l’aptitude à énoncer des valeurs,
- le recours à des données probantes pour vérifier des hypothèses.
Le Centre s’est doté d’un solide système d’évaluation décentralisé qui satisfait aux exigences multiples de sa mission, de sa structure et de son modèle de programmation. Au CRDI, l’évaluation est une responsabilité partagée, et les évaluations sont exécutées au niveau des projets et des programmes de même qu’au niveau organisationnel.
Browse
Browsing Evaluation / Évaluation by Title
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item À la recherche d'une solution provisoire en matière d'irrigation : les chercheurs de la Syrie tentent de déterminer si - dans certaines conditions – il serait possible d'utiliser les eaux saumâtres pour l'irrigation sans endommager le sol(Section de l'évaluation, CRDI, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2004) Dale, StephenItem Acacia 2006-2010 final report(Acacia Program Initiative, IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2010) IDRC. Acacia Program InitiativeThe report was written ahead of the Acacia program’s closure, meaning, of the 157 research activities approved to date for this Prospectus period, 52% of Acacia’s projects were currently in progress. The program focuses on improving economic development and opportunities (how ICTs broadly influence social and economic development in Africa); enhancing social service delivery (how ICTs help African governments be more effective in the delivery of citizens’ services); and empowering citizens (how the use of ICTs can reinforce citizens’ capabilities). The report includes financial information, project outputs and outcomes, analysis, and lessons learned. Bibliographic references are included.Item Acacia in Kenya : a study of information and communication technologies and community development; final research report(2001) Etta, Florence; Agonga, Aquinata; Katia, SalomeACACIA was initiated in response to the call for an African Information Society Initiative (AISI) endorsed by African governments as an action framework to build Africa’s information and communication infrastructure. Between 1997 and 2000, Acacia concentrated its work in four sub-Saharan Africa countries: Mozambique, Senegal, South Africa and Uganda. The Telecommunications context in Kenya was a major determinant in the location of many of Acacia’s early projects. This report reviews activities and outcomes of the project up to this point. Five training manuals and curricula were developed in the areas of ICT.Item Acacia Research and Learning Forum, Dakar, Sénégal, October 4-8, 2009 : narrative report(2010) Sey, Araba; Martin, Aaron; Sinha, ChaitaliThis narrative report evaluates the Acacia Research and Learning Forum through the lens of the program’s Theory of Change. After twelve years of research capacity development, network building, and contributions to policy dialogue and scholarly publications, Acacia is experiencing both triumphs and tensions. Internet access and broadband infrastructure are major issues in many African countries. Acacia supports relevant ICT4D research that can be communicated to the public, the media and policy makers in order to effect positive social, economic, political, and cultural change, and spur technical and social innovation in Africa.Item Acacia Team Meeting, April - May 2002 : evaluation(IDRC, Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa , Nairobi, KE, 2002) Etta, Florence E.Participants were asked to rank six dimensions of the meeting using a 10-point scale. This is a brief summary of a questionnaire regarding the success of a workshop meeting of the Acacia project implementation team meeting. ACACIA worked with African partners to help countries in Africa apply information and communication technologies (ICTs) to social and economic development.Item Accountability framework for technological innovation(2010-02) Whitty, BrendanTo 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.Item 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, YuliaTechnological 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.Item Accountability principles for policy oriented research organisations : a guide to the framework and online database(One World Trust, London, GB, 2011) Hammer, Michael; Whitty, BrendanAfter years of empirical research and collaborative engagement with a wide variety of organisations, the accountability framework supports research organisations’ ability to respond, in a structured way, to the challenges of increasing attention and demands for accountability. The Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO) explores the meaning and use of concepts of accountability among organisations that conduct research which are influential in the formation of public policy. The accountability framework identifies core principles, work processes and types of stakeholders that are relevant to all policy-oriented research organisations.Item Accountability Principles for Research Institutes: On-line Forum Report, Feb-Mar 2008(2008) Whitty, BrendanThe 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.Item Accountability principles for research organisations(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, BrendanThe 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.Item Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO), phase II : putting the principles into practice(One World Trust, London, GB, 2009) One World TrustThis 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.Item 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, BrendanItem Accountability principles for research organisations : final narrative report(One World Trust, London, GB, 2009) Whitty, Brendan; Hammer, MichaelThe project aimed to enhance current understandings on issues of accountability in the context of research institutes (RIs) that engage in policy relevant research. The first phase of Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO) formulated a framework of accountability guidelines for research organisations founded on four principles of accountability: participation, transparency, evaluation and complaints handling. Given their influence and potential impact on policy, it is important that RI’s are accountable to those on whom they will have an impact. This report covers project activities, organizations, stakeholders, outcomes and recommendations.Item Accountability principles for research organisations : final technical report; the journey(One World Trust, GB, 2012-02) Hammer, MichaelEvidence is critical in the formulation and communication of public policy. Policy-oriented research reflects not only a government’s or intergovernmental organization’s recognition of issues, and potential ways to address them, but also determines flows of public funds, progress on a range of connected policy issues, and the shape and form of programs that affect peoples’ lives. The final framework for accountability processes promotes principles of accountability most useful for informing the structuring of relationships with stakeholders, such as duties that may arise in explicit and tacit relationships, and measuring openness to change and innovation rather than ‘performance.’Item Accountability principles for research organisations : toolkit(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, BrendanItem Action and reflection : a guide for monitoring and evaluating participatory research(IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA, 1999) Vernooy, Ronnie; McAllister, KarenItem Ad Hoc Committee report on the review of the Agriculture, Food, and Nutrition Sciences Division of the International Development Research Centre(IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA, 1986) Castillo, G.T.; Poirier, R.P.Item Addressing accountability in NGO advocacy: Practice, principles and prospects of self-regulation(2010-03) Hammer, Michael; Rooney, Charlotte; Warren, ShanaBased 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.Item Addressing the question of attribution in evaluation(IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA, 2004)