Evaluation Standards

Synonyms:

Norms,

Evaluation standards identify how the quality of an evaluation will be judged. They can be used when planning an evaluation as well as for meta-evaluation (evaluating the evaluation).

Many organizations have guidelines which address issues of quality and ethics together. For example, the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) Norms for Evaluation state that evaluation in UNDP should be:

Independent — Management must not impose restrictions on the scope, content, comments and recommendations of evaluation reports. Evaluators must be free of conflict of interest.
Intentional — The rationale for an evaluation and the decisions to be based on it should be clear from the outset.
Transparent — Meaningful consultation with stakeholders is essential for the credibility and utility of the evaluation.
Ethical — Evaluation should not reflect personal or sectoral interests. Evaluators must have professional integrity, respect the rights of institutions and individuals to provide information in confidence, and be sensitive to the beliefs and customs of local social and cultural environments.
Impartial — Removing bias and maximizing objectivity are critical for the credibility of the evaluation and its contribution to knowledge.
Of high quality — All evaluations should meet minimum quality standards defined by the Evaluation Office
Timely — Evaluations must be designed and completed in a timely fashion so as to ensure the usefulness of the findings and recommendations
Used — Evaluation is a management discipline that seeks to provide information to be used for evidence-based decision making. To enhance the usefulness of the findings and recommendations, key stakeholders should be engaged in various ways in the conduct of the evaluation.

Resources

Overview

Evaluation Ethics, Politics, Standards, and Guiding Principles - This is a module taken from the International Program for Development Evaluation Training (IPDET) program. It elaborates on the potential ethical and political challenges facing evaluators and describes the role and value of standards and guiding principles in development evaluation.
Evaluation, valuation, negotiation: some reflections towards a culture of evaluation - This article explores the issues of developing standards for an evaluation, when these have not previously been agreed, in a rural development program in Argentina.

Examples

Evaluation Standards for Aotearoa New Zealand - ANZEA (Aotearoa New Zealand Evaluation Association) has worked in partnership with SuPERU to develop a set of Aotearoa specific Evaluation Standards that set out the expectations of the evaluation process, practices and products.
UNEG (United Nations Evaluation Group) norms and standards - to be used by UN agencies. Available in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish
Evaluation Standards for Latin America and the Caribbean (2016) - The evaluation standards for Latin America and the Caribbean were developed by a task force of the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Evaluation (ReLAC). They are available in Espagnol, Português and English.
DFAT Aid Program Monitoring and Evaluation Standards - These Standards (valid April 2014 to April 2015 ) were developed by the Indonesia Program as part of their Evaluation Capacity Building Program and were integrated into agency-wide evaluation guidance in 2012.
DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation - 2012 revised version endorsed by members of the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development) available in English, French, German, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish.
Joint Committee on Educational Evaluation - originally developed for the evaluation of educational programs but now used more widely.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE) - This webpage from the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation provides a range of statements which describe each of the standards developed to support program evaluation.
African Evaluation Standards - 2002 adaptation of the Joint Committee Standards to suit African contexts
Uganda Evaluation Standards (2013) - This set of standards was developed by the Uganda Evaluation Asociation (UEA) in order to guide evaluations that take place in Uganda to ensure a good standard of practice is demonstrated by evaluators during evaluations.
South African Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Standards for Evaluation in Government - This guide outlines the standards by which government evaluations should take place. The standards encourage the utilisation of findings and consider standards in relation to five stages of evaluation.

Sources

UNDP 2011, The Evaluation Policy of UNDP, Executive Board Document viahttp ://web.undp.org/evaluation/ .

Updated: 20th July 2017 - 4:22pm

This Option is useful for:

Manage Evaluation

Comments

I liked very much the standards article. However, is it true that "Evaluation is a management discipline that seeks to provide information to be used for evidence-based decision making"? Does this mean that you cannot carry out an evaluation unless there is a TOR with some institution? As I am currently writing a chapter on Evaluation from the gender perspective, I would like to do an evaluation of self-organising around spatial development. These groups do not commission evaluations although they are willing to cooperate in it. Will this not be an evaluation although the other standards will be followed?

Thanks for your comment, Liisa. You've highlighted the need to look carefully at the appropriateness of using standards that have been developed to suit a different context. The UNDP standards have been developed for their context, to cover their discrete evaluations that have a formal TOR.

It's important to recognise that there are different types of evaluation. Evaluation can be done by an external evaluator/evaluation team, by an internal evaluator/evaluation team, by the group involved in implementation, or by the community or advocates for the community - or by a combination of these. You can read more about these choices on the task page Decide Who Will Conduct The Evaluation - http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/plan/manage_evaluation/who_conducts

The other issue you've highlighted is the description of evaluation as a management discipline. This is not the only way to describe evaluation, especially if management is understood to refer to formal, bureaucratic management. As you've suggested, evaluation can be used by community groups and self-managed networks.

We'd be interested in hearing more about the chapter you're writing on evaluation from the gender perspective. You might find Gillian Fletcher's blog useful http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/blog/gender_injustice_and_inequality-... and her guide to addressing gender in impact evaluation http://www.betterevaluation.org/resources/addressing_gender_in_impact_ev....

Please let us know if you would like to recommend other resources to add to our thematic page on evaluation and gender analysis http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/themes/gender_analysis