What is it?
A review process (also referred to a meta-evaluation) is an important part of the implementation process. It enables critical reflection and reviews of the effectiveness of R,M&E systems, studies and evaluation capacity development strategies. Reviews can be undertaken on evaluation or research plans and M&E frameworks prior to implementation, and on evaluation and assessment reports after implementation.
The main BetterEvaluation site provides options for undertaking a review, including expert reviews, peer-reviews and more. The Steps to Planning and Managing Evaluations also provides guidance on including a both a technical review process and a review by key stakeholders of the evaluation/study design prior to implementation (towards the end of the section). These pages are recommended background reading before considering options to apply to C4D.
Meta-Evaluation and C4D
Applying the C4D Evaluation Principles
|Critical reflection throughout all aspects of the RM&E helps to maintain the quality of the RM&E and identify areas for improvement or extra attention. It it is particularly important where participatory RM&E approaches are used in order to maintain an eye to issues of power and voice. Developing meta-evaluation processes helps to formalise the processes and procedures that will incorporate this in to an implementable plan for regular critical reflection.|
|Including review or meta-evaluation processes in C4D R,M&E systems is a key part of being learning-based, using critical reflection processes, and it contributes to capacity development. The aim is to continually strengthen and improve R,M&E processes so that they better meet the needs of the people and organizations involved and help to create more sustainable, learning-oriented C4D organizations and initiatives.|
|This task enables mutual learning and engagement among partners, relevant institutions and community groups.|
Recommended options and adaptations for C4D
The C4D Evaluation Framework would encourage an inclusive, participatory approach to meta-evaluation, such as beneficiary exchange, Group critical reflection, Individual critical reflection or Peer review; as well as expert review where this is deemed valuable by stakeholders.