Title: Cindy Clapp-Wincek, Director, PPL/LER
1Update on Evaluation at USAID
- Cindy Clapp-Wincek, Director, PPL/LER
- USAID Alumni Association
- March 7 , 2014
2Weve made progress, but still have a long way to
go.
Evaluation Update in 2012
Evaluation Update in 2013
3Evaluation and
Collaborative Learning
Program Evaluation
Performance Monitoring
Evidence Based Planning and Implementation
4Major 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
5Notable 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.
Missions have formed working groups to strengthen
evaluation practices and collaboration.
The Program Cycle encourages internal
collaboration, sharing knowledge, learning, and
adapting.
6USAID is improving transparency by sharing more
evaluation reports
7LER develops training and tools to support USAID
staff capacity
Learning Lab ProgramNet PMP Toolkit Internal
Evaluations 1200 staff trained in
Evaluation 350 staff participated in
Performance Monitoring Workshops ME Guidance
Tools How-to and Technical Notes
8Where do we go from here?
- Support missions virtual and in-country
technical assistance, tools, and new awards for
ME 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
9- View USAID monitoring and evaluation guidance and
tools at http//usaidlearninglab.org - Send questions to evaluation_at_usaid.gov
10(No Transcript)
11Extra slides on quality
12Responsibilities for Quality Factors
MetaEvaluation of Quality of USAID Evaluation
Reports
13Bureau for Policy, Planning Learning
Evaluation of Program Cycle Implementation