1 / 6

The complex evaluation framework

Evaluating complex programs presents unique challenges due to their non-linear nature, diverse components, and the involvement of multiple stakeholders, including donors and national agencies. Unlike simple projects, complex interventions often have broad, less-defined objectives, making traditional evaluation methods inadequate. This article discusses the special challenges inherent in assessing outcomes for complex programs and explores alternative evaluation strategies. It highlights the significance of theory-driven approaches, mixed-method designs, and innovative techniques for estimating impacts and strengthening evaluation frameworks.

elan
Télécharger la présentation

The complex evaluation framework

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The complex evaluation framework

  2. Simple projects, complicated programs and complex development interventions • country-led planning and evaluation • Non linear • Many components or services • Often covers whole country • Multiple and broad objectives • May provide budget support with no clear definition of scope or services • multiple donors and agencies • context is critical Large, complex Complex interventions • May include a number of projects and wider scope • Often involves several blueprint approaches • Defined objectives but often broader and less precise and harder to measure • Often not time-bound • Context important • multiple donors and national agencies Complicated programs Simple projects Small, simple • “blue print” producing standardized product • relatively linear • Limited number of services • Time-bound • defined and often small target population • Defined objectives

  3. The Special Challenges of Assessing Outcomes for Complex Programs • Most conventional impact evaluation designs cannot be applied to evaluating complex programs • No clearly defined activities or objectives • General budget and technical support integrated into broader government programs • Multiple activities • Target populations not clearly defined • Time-lines may not be clearly defined

  4. Special challenges continued • Multiple actors • No baseline data • Difficult to define a conventional comparison group

  5. Alternative approaches for defining the counterfactual for complex interventions 1. Theory driven evaluation 3. Quantitative approaches • Qualitative approaches • Mixed method designs • Rating scales • Integrated strategies for strengthening the evaluation designs

  6. STRATEGIES FOR EVALUATING COMPLEX PROGRAMS • Counterfactual designs • Attribution analysis • Contribution analysis • Substitution analysis Estimating impacts The value-added of agency X Theory-based approaches Net increase in resources for a program Mixed method designs • strengthening alternative counterfactuals • “Unpacking complex programs” • Portfolio analysis • Reconstructing baseline data • Creative use of secondary data • Secondary data • Triangulation Qualitative approaches Quantitative approaches Rating scales

More Related