Management of the Thematic Evaluations

Background

Each TEC thematic evaluation has been individually commissioned:

  • Coordination: OCHA
  • Needs assessment: FAO, SDC and WHO (through the International Centre for Migration and Health; ICMH)
  • Capacities: UNDP and AIDMI (All India Disaster Mitigation Institute)
  • LRRD: Sida
  • Funding response: Danida

In addition, the TEC thematic evaluations have varied in management and structure. For example, three of the five thematic evaluations - coordination, needs assessment and capacities - benefited from the management of a multi-agency Steering Committee (SC), while representatives from the evaluation departments of the two respective commissioning agencies for LRRD and the Funding Study constituted the SC. These bodies took the major decisions on the evaluations, including the selection of the evaluation teams and signing-off on the final report.

The same three studies employed one overall team each, with different use of national consultants in countries visited. LRRD, on the other hand, first employed a senior researcher to undertake a review of current debates in LRRD. This then provided the conceptual framework for the work of the subsequent evaluation, which was undertaken by three separate teams: one looking at the response in Sri Lanka, one in Indonesia, and another undertaking a policy level analysis that also involved work at HQ. These three studies were then synthesised into the overall LRRD report.

The funding study was the most complex of the five evaluations. Broken down into eight overall study areas, this evaluation consists of 30 sub-studies which have been synthesised into a single report for each of the topics considered. These sub-syntheses were themselves then synthesised into the overall Funding Response Report.

Role of the Thematic Evaluation Steering Committees

The evaluation Steering Committees (SC) provided overall management guidance for the evaluation, as well as funding. The SCs have been chaired by the commissioning agency(s) for each study, and for three of the five evaluations - coordination, needs assessment and capacities - the SC comprised a further core group of participating agencies. The role of the SCs was to:

  • Ensure an inclusive process to finalise the TOR.
  • Provide funding for the evaluation and assist in the mobilization of resources (financial and kind).
  • Participate in the selection of the evaluation team members (identifying the team, and ensuring quality throughout the process).
  • Participate in teleconferences on key issues regarding this evaluation.
  • Advise their own agencies and staff on this evaluation as well as coordinate agency internal substantive feedback back to the group.
  • Ensure field representatives are aware of the TEC and fully involved and available to contribute to the evaluation.
  • Participate in any workshop that may be planned once the draft report has been received.

Role of the Thematic Working Groups

In addition, the evaluations on coordination, needs assessment and capacities also benefited from a wider evaluation Working Group (WG). The WG comprised additional agencies and donors that 'signed up' to participate in the different evaluations but were not in a position to provide active management guidance. While not part of the SCs, these theme members were nevertheless expected to provide support to the thematic evaluations in any number of the following ways:

  • Provide funding for this evaluation.
  • Provide technical advise or staff on secondment.
  • Provide comments on the inception report and on the draft reports.
  • Ensure field representatives are aware of the TEC and fully involved and available to contribute to this evaluation and related workshops.
  • Provide in-kind support at country level (ie. Facilitate meetings, transport, contacts).
  • Advise their own agencies and staff on this evaluation as well as coordinate agency internal substantive feedback back to the group.