Translate with Google Translate
 

Tsunami Evaluation Coalition: Thematic evaluations

Background

Each TEC thematic evaluation was 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 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 for those evaluations. These bodies took the major decisions on the evaluations, including the selection of the evaluation teams and signing off the final reports.

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 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 were 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 (SCs) provided overall management guidance for the evaluations, as well as funding. The SCs were chaired by the commissioning agency(s) for each study. 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 mobilisation of resources (financial and in 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 the evaluation
  • advise their own agencies and staff on the evaluation as well as coordinating internal substantive feedback back to the group
  • ensure field representatives were aware of the TEC and fully involved and available to contribute to the evaluation
  • participate in workshops planned after receipt of the draft report.

Role of the Thematic Working Groups

In addition, the evaluations on coordination, needs assessment and capacities 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 of the following ways:

  • funding for the evaluation
  • technical advice or staff on secondment
  • comments on the inception report and on the draft reports
  • ensure field representatives were aware of the TEC and fully involved and available to contribute to the evaluation and related workshops  
  • Provide in-kind support at country level (ie, facilitating meetings, transport, contacts)
  • advising their own agencies and staff on the evaluation as well as coordinating internal substantive feedback back to the group.

 

  • Share this page:
  • Email
  • Print

Before you download this file, please answer two questions to help us monitor usage

1) What do you think you'll use this document for?

  • Other:

1) What is your email address?

2) What is the name of your organisation?

Please answer both questions above Submit

Starting your download...

Pilot version: You are downloading the pilot version of this guide; we welcome any feedback you have. Please email EHA@alnap.org

Close this overlay