Print This Page
Print This Page |
Types of evaluation
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z |
| C (Top) | |
| Cluster evaluation | |
| D (Top) | |
| Discretionary external evaluation | Discretionary internal evaluation/Self-evaluations |
| E (Top) | |
| Ex-post evaluation | External evaluation |
| F (Top) | |
| Formative evaluation | |
| I (Top) | |
| In-depth evaluation | Internal evaluation |
| J (Top) | |
| Joint evaluation |
| M (Top) | |
| Mandatory external evaluation | Meta-evaluation |
| Mandatory internal evaluation/Self-assessments | |
| P (Top) | |
| Participatory evaluation | Project evaluation |
| S (Top) | |
| Self-evaluation | Strategic evaluation |
| T (Top) | |
| Thematic evaluation | |
An evaluation of a set of related outputs, projects and/or programmes or subprogrammes.
See also: “Evaluation”
An evaluation requested by programme managers inthe United Nations Secretariat and managed and conducted by entities outside the programme being evaluated such as theJoint Inspection Unit (JIU) or the Office of Internal oversight Services (OIOS), or any external evaluator. In this type of evaluation, the programme manager requests the JIU, OIOS or the external evaluator, to design, manage and/or conduct the evaluation, while the programme manager's role is as the "evaluaee".
Discretionary external evaluations are primarily useful for programme managers who wish to improve the performance of their programmes on the basis of objective assessments, though they may also be useful to support decision-making at the governance level.
See also: "External evaluation", "Internal evaluation", "In-depth evaluation"
These are optional, non-mandatory evaluations conducted by programme managers for their own use. They address issues that are over and above those covered by Mandatory Internal Evaluation/Self-assessments. They are normally not required to be reported upon at the intergovernmental level. While manages may contract external consultants and specialists to help with the exercise, these evaluatons are considered internal or self-evaluations because the programme managers remain responsible for the design and/or management of the evaluation, and are ultimately responsible for the quality of the reports and for using the results to improve operations. Such self-evaluations are useful when formulating best-practices and lessons-learned and can cover cross-cutting issues relevant to a number of subprogrammes.
See also: "External evaluation", "Internal evaluation", "Mandatory internal evaluation/Self-assessments"
An assessment of the relevance, effectiveness and impact of a programme or project that is carried out some time after its completion. It may be undertaken directly after or long after completion. The intention is to identify the factors of success or failure, to assess the sustainability of results and impacts, and to draw conclusions that may inform other projects and programmes.
See also: “Evaluation”, “Best practice”, “Lesson learned”, “Learning”, “Summative evaluation”
An evaluation performed by entities outside of the programme being evaluated. Generally, it is intergovernmental organs that commission such evaluations and receive final reports on them. As a rule, external evaluation of a project, programme or subprogramme is conducted by entities free of control or influence by those responsible for the design and implementation of the project and programmes.
In the United Nations Secretariat, there are two types of external evaluation, namely: (1) Mandatory External Evaluation and (2) Discretionary External Evaluation. (Under exceptional circumstances, the Secretary-General may commission high level external evaluation undertaken by renowned authorities or experts)
See also: "Evaluation", "Internal evaluation", "Mandatory external evaluation", "Discretionalry external evaluation"
Sometimes known as interim evaluation, it is conducted during implementation phase of projects or programmes to improve their performance. Formative evaluations may also be conducted for other reasons such as compliance, legal requirements or as part of a larger evaluation initiative. It is intended for managers and direct supporters of a project.
See also: “Evaluation”
Refers to the scope of the evaluation and is not to be considered a category or type of evaluation.
Both internal and external evaluation can be "in-depth" when they take a comprehensive and broad-ranging review of the work of a programme or organizational entity. In-depth evaluation can be undertaken by external entities or by programme managers. The objective is to make recommendations that will help the Senior Managers, intergovernmental bodies or the General Assembly to formulate decisions aimed at increasing the overall relevance, effectiveness and impact of the programmes of the United Nations.
See also: “Evaluation”, "External evaluation", "Internal evaluation"
Evaluation that is managed and/or conducted by entities within the programmes being evaluated. There are two types of internal evaluation, namely:
(1) Mandatory Internal Evaluation (Self-assessmetns)
(2) Discretionary Internal Evaluation (Self-evaluation)
See also: "External evaluation", "Self-evaluation”, "Mandatory internal evaluation/Self-assessments", "Discretionary internal evaluation/self-evaluation", “Accomplishment account”, “Results-based management (RBM)”
An evaluation in which different programmes, agencies and/or partners contribute and participate.
See also: “Evaluation”
Mandatory external evaluation (Back / Top)
An evaluation mandated by an Intergovernmental body that is managed and performed by an entity outside the programme being evaluated. Mandatory external evaluations are mandated by bodies such as the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC), functional commissions, regional and sectoral intergovernmental bodies and other technical bodies. Mandatory external evaluatons are generally managed and conducted by the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) as part of its UN-wide mandate, and by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), as well as by appointed external evaluators.
Mandatory external evaluations are primarily useful for oversight and support to decision-making at the governance level, while they also may be useful for programme managers.
See also: "External evaluation", "Internal evaluation", "In-depth evalaution"
Mandatory internal evaluation/Self-assessments (Back / Top)
These are compulsary assessments performed by programme managers once every two years. These assessment are required for all United Nations Secretariat programmes and are framed by the logical frameworks in the approved bienniual programme budget documents. They are reported on through the biennial Programme Performance Report (PPR). They use information generated by measuring the extent to which Expected Accomplishments were achieved through the collection of indicator data and use of IMDIS tool as a means to record progress and report results and accomplishments. They may also use information generated from other types of evaluation and assessment, as appropriate.
See also: "External evaluation", "Internal evaluation"
Meta-evaluation (Back / Top)
An evaluation designed to aggregate findings from a series of related evaluations dealing with a common topic.
See also: “Evaluation”
A broad term for the involvement of various stakeholders in evaluation. It involves the collective examination and assessment of a project or subprogramme by the stakeholders (programme managers and staff included) and solicits views of end-users and beneficiaries. Participatory evaluations involve reflective, action-oriented assessments of performance and accomplishment which yield lessons learned and instructive practices.
See also: “Evaluation”
Evaluation of an individual project designed to achieve specific objectives within specified resources, in an adopted time span and following an established plan of action, often within the framework of a broader programme. The basis of evaluation should be built into the project document.
See also: “Evaluation”
Self-evaluation is a systematic assessment carried out by those entrusted with the design and delivery of a programme, the findings of which are used to improve planning, performance and programme results.
See also: “Evaluation”
An evaluation of a particular issue, often cross-cutting, with significant implications for the major priorities of Member States and the Secretariat with high risks to stakeholders. Its timing may be especially important owing to the urgency of the issue which poses high risks to, and has generated conflicting views from stakeholders.
An evaluation focused entirely on a single, cross-cutting theme or activity in order to assess cumulative effects of multiple programmes that share common objectives and purposes. It aims to appraise the effectiveness of coordination and cooperation between different programmes of the Secretariat in the thematic area.
See also: “Evaluation”