Example: dental hygienist

No. 2 Vienna Workshop, 1999 Evaluation - OECD.org

Evaluation AND AID EFFECTIVENESSORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTE valuationFeedback forEffectiveLearning andAccountabilityDEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEEEVALUATION AND AID EFFECTIVENESS5No. 1- Guidance for Evaluating Humanitarian Assistance In Complex EmergenciesNo. 2- Evaluating Country ProgrammesVienna workshop , 1999No. 3- Donor Support for Institutional CapacityDevelopment in Environment:Lessons LearnedNo. 4- Effective Practices in Conducting aJoint Multi-Donor EvaluationNo. 5- Evaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and AccountabilityNo. 5- Evaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and AccountabilityOECD01 ISBN 92-64-19454-1-:HSTCQE=V^YZYU: OECD, 2001. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software isprohibited.

Evaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and Accountability ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT publi.sgml.compo.fm Page 1 Friday, June 8, 2001 8:39 AM

Tags:

  Code, Evaluation, 2010, Workshop, 1999, Vienna, 2 vienna workshop, 1999 evaluation

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of No. 2 Vienna Workshop, 1999 Evaluation - OECD.org

1 Evaluation AND AID EFFECTIVENESSORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTE valuationFeedback forEffectiveLearning andAccountabilityDEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEEEVALUATION AND AID EFFECTIVENESS5No. 1- Guidance for Evaluating Humanitarian Assistance In Complex EmergenciesNo. 2- Evaluating Country ProgrammesVienna workshop , 1999No. 3- Donor Support for Institutional CapacityDevelopment in Environment:Lessons LearnedNo. 4- Effective Practices in Conducting aJoint Multi-Donor EvaluationNo. 5- Evaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and AccountabilityNo. 5- Evaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and AccountabilityOECD01 ISBN 92-64-19454-1-:HSTCQE=V^YZYU: OECD, 2001. Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use reproduction, lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software isprohibited.

2 You must treat the Program and associated materials and any elements thereof like any othercopyrighted requests should be made to:Head of Publications Service,OECD Publications Service,2, rue Andr -Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, Feedbackfor Effective Learningand AccountabilityORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND Page 1 Friday, June 8, 2001 8:39 AMORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTP ursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, andwhich came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operationand Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a risingstandard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thusto contribute to the development of the world economy; to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-membercountries in the process of economic development.

3 And to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatorybasis in accordance with international original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark,France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway,Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the datesindicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia(7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic(21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), Korea(12th December 1996) and the Slovak Republic (14th December 2000).

4 The Commission ofthe European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECDC onvention).In order to achieve its aims the OECD has set up a number of specialised committees. One of these is theDevelopment Assistance Committee, whose Members have agreed to secure an expansion of aggregate volume ofresources made available to developing countries and to improve their effectiveness. To this end, Membersperiodically review together both the amount and the nature of their contributions to aid programmes, bilateraland multilateral, and consult each other on all other relevant aspects of their development assistance Members of the Development Assistance Committee are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada,Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, NewZealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States and theCommission of the European Communities.

5 OECD 2001 Permission to reproduce a portion of this work for non-commercial purposes or classroomuse should be obtained through the Centre fran ais d exploitation du droit de copie (CFC),20, rue des Grands-Augustins, 75006 Paris, France, tel. (33-1) 44 07 47 70, fax (33-1) 46 34 67 19,for every country except the United States. In the United States permission should beobtained through the Copyright Clearance Center, Customer Service, (508)750-8400,222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA, or CCC Online: All otherapplications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this book should be madeto OECD Publications, 2, rue Andr -Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, Page 2 Friday, June 8, 2001 8:39 AM 3 OECD 2001 ForewordEvaluation systems face many challenges.

6 In addition to the quality, rele-vance and timeliness of the Evaluation itself, a major challenge lies in conveyingthe Evaluation results to multiple audiences both inside and outside develop-ment agencies. Thus feedback and communication of Evaluation results are inte-gral parts of the Evaluation cycle. Effective feedback contributes to improvingdevelopment policies, programmes and practices by providing policymakers withthe relevant Evaluation information for making informed origin of the Working Party on Aid Evaluation s (WP-EV) attention to feed-back issues stems from the 1998 Review of the DAC Principles for Evaluation ofDevelopment Assistance . This report highlighted a concern widespread in DACM embers central Evaluation offices about the adequacy of current practices fordisseminating lessons from evaluations.

7 In a subsequent document, Complement-ing and Reinforcing the DAC Principles for Aid Evaluation (1998), it was concludedthat feedback and communication practises need to be improved, and that evalu-ation results should be used more actively in order to enhance current and futureaid policies and take this work forward the Japanese Government hosted a DAC WP-EVworkshop in Tokyo on 26-28 September 2000 entitled Evaluation Feedback forEffective Learning and Accountability . The purpose of this conference was toshare experiences among WP Members and other participants and to draw lessonsfrom current practices in the area of feedback publication is composed of two parts: The workshop Report, based on thefore-mentioned meeting, highlights the various issues raised, topics of discussionand different feedback systems, and outlines the areas identified by participantsas most relevant for improving Evaluation feedback.

8 The Background SynthesisReport, intended as a starting point for discussion at the workshop , outlines themain concerns and challenges facing Evaluation feedback and the means toaddress these. The report is based on an analysis of questionnaire results, and areview of previous initiatives in this would like to thank the Japanese Government, and in particular the evaluationdepartments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Japan International Page 3 Friday, June 8, 2001 8:39 AMEvaluation Feedback for Effective Learning and Accountability 4 OECD 2001 Agency (JICA) and Japan Bank for International co-operation (JBIC) for hosting theworkshop, and for their financial support for the conference and this publication. Iam also grateful to members of the Steering Group who helped prepare the event,and to workshop participants for contributing quality presentations and workshop Report draws heavily on participants individual contributions,including power point presentations, papers and speeches.

9 The Institute ofDevelopment Studies (IDS), and in particular Geoff Barnard (Head of Information,Project Manager) and Catherine Cameron (Senior Consultant), was commissionedby Japan to prepare the reports and I would like to express my appreciation toboth authors for their DabelsteinChair of the Working Party on Aid EvaluationThe Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Working Party on Aid Evaluationis an international forum where bilateral and multilateral development evaluationexperts meet periodically to share experience to improve Evaluation practice andstrengthen its use as an instrument for development co-operation operates under the aegis of the DAC and presently consists of 30 represen-tatives from OECD Member countries and multilateral development agencies(Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland,France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Germany, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom,United States, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank,Inter-American Development Bank.)

10 European Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment, UN Development Programme, International Monetary Fund, plustwo non-DAC Observers, Mexico and Korea).Further information may be obtained from Hans Lundgren, Advisor on AidEffectiveness, OECD, Development Cooperation Directorate, 2, rue Andr -Pascal,75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. Website: Page 4 Friday, June 8, 2001 8:39 AM 5 OECD 2001 Table of ContentsPart Summary ..111. INTRODUCTION ..132. THE CHANGING AID LANDSCAPE ..153. THE FEEDBACK CHALLENGE .. and The learning frontier .. Obstacles to learning .. the demand side ..214. UNDERSTANDING TARGET AUDIENCES .. , ministers and boards .. Media .. NGOs and The general public .. The case for disclosure ..265. GETTING THE MESSAGE ACROSS.


Related search queries