Cindy Clapp-Wincek, Director, PPL/LER

USAID Alumni Association

March 7 , 2014

Update on Evaluation at USAID

2

Evaluation Update in 2012

Evaluation Update in 2013:You are

here:

We’ve made progress, but still have a long way to go.

Evaluation and……

Evidence Based Planning and

Implementation

Performance Monitoring

Program Evaluation

Collaborative Learning

4

Major data sources and analysis behind the Update

• Evaluation Registry of PPR

• Development Experience Clearinghouse

• USAID Forward Progress Report 2013

• Evaluation of Program Cycle Implementation

• Meta-evaluation of Quality and Coverage of USAID Evaluations 2009 – 2012

5

Notable Findings of Recent Studies

Evaluation quality has improved - average quality scores 5.56 in 2009 6.69 in 2012

The Evaluation Policy has contributed to improved evaluation rigor, quality, usefulness, and quantity.

The Program Cycle encourages internal collaboration, sharing knowledge, learning, and adapting.

Missions have formed working groups to strengthen evaluation practices and collaboration.

6

USAID is improving transparency by sharing more evaluation reports

LER develops training and toolsto support USAID staff capacity

Learning Lab & ProgramNet

PMP Toolkit

Internal Evaluations

1200+ staff trained in Evaluation

350 staff participated in Performance Monitoring Workshops

M&E Guidance Tools: How-to and Technical Notes

Where do we go from here?

• Support missions – virtual and in-country technical assistance, tools, and new awards for M&E training, conducting evaluations

• Work with organizations that produce evaluations – particularly firms

• Address constraints – e.g. collaborate with contracts office on adaptive management

• Partner with regional “missions”

• View USAID monitoring and evaluation guidance and tools at http://usaidlearninglab.org

• Send questions to evaluation@usaid.gov

9

10

EXTRA SLIDES ON QUALITY

11

Responsibilities for Quality Factors

“MetaEvaluation of Quality of USAID Evaluation Reports”

“Bureau for Policy, Planning & Learning: Evaluation of Program Cycle Implementation”