C4D Hub: Synthesise data across studies (research, monitoring data, evaluations)

What is it?

There are often questions beyond a single program or initiative, such as “Do these types of interventions work?” or “For whom, in what ways and under what circumstances do they work?” Answering these kinds of questions means locating the evidence, assessing the quality and relevance (and deciding whether or not to include it), extracting the relevant information, and synthesising it. The evidence may be sourced from bibliographic databases, unpublished studies, etc.

General Information

The main BetterEvaluation site includes comprehensive information on a range of options, with links to further resources and tools. These range from the more rigorous systematic review options, through to rapid options of evidence assessment. 3ie also has a list of resources, particularly on the more rigourous and technical systematic review options such as Cochrane and Campbell. It is recommended that some or all of these resources are reviewed before considering options to apply to C4D.

Synthesise data across evaluations and C4D

Applying the C4D Principles


Synthesising data from across evaluations can be a useful way for better understanding the critical factors and qualities that make for successful C4D.  


To ensure a critical and equity-focused approach, and to account for the complexity of different outcomes for different groups, the realist synthesis option would be useful for exploring what works for whom and in what circumstances. 


There are less expensive options, such as rapid evidence assessment, which may be useful where there is a need to realistically balance available resources and appropriate rigour. 


This task can be undertaken in a participatory way, supporting mutual learning.

Recommended options and adaptations for C4D

Sources of data for a synthesis of C4D evidence

  • The Communication Initiative is a large repository of reports and evidence relating to C4D. It is searchable through text-search and filters.  
  • In an agency like UNICEF, it would be possible to synthesise evidence about C4D across different countries and regions from public and internal program evaluation reports.
  • Desk reviews are a common type of data synthesis approach, often commissioned to inform program design.   
  • For UNICEF only - UNICEF C4D is developing partnerships to enable a fast commissioning process for rapid evidence assessments in emergency contexts.   

Recommended options

Best Evidence Synthesis approach - an approach to assembling and synthesising a wide range of evidence. It is consistent with the C4D Evaluation Framework in the following ways:

  • participatory: Builds in an iterative, participatory approach to building and using a knowledge base.
  • holisticThe approach is not as strict about what can be included as evidence compared to some other systematic review methods. Single case studies, can, for example, be included. The approach is also sensitive to the impact of context. 
  • learning-basedThe goals of Best Evidence Synthesis are building a knowledge-base that can be applied in programs. 

Examples of systematic/literature reviews 

There are many examples of systematic reviews relating to C4D. The Communication Initiative is a valuable source, and through a combination of filters for program areas and search terms such as 'systematic review' 'evidence synthesis' these should be relatively easy to find.


There are currently no comments. Be the first to comment on this page!

Add new comment

Login Login and comment as BetterEvaluation member or simply fill out the fields below.