Reviewing an evaluation (also known as meta-evaluation) can be done before an evaluation (reviewing the plan) or afterwards. Prior to finalising the evaluation it is useful to review the reporting of the evaluation process, findings and conclusions in order to establish the validity of the findings and to ensure that the key messages from the evaluation are clear and consistent with the findings.
Expert panels are used when specialized input and opinion is required for an evaluation. Generally, a variety of experts are engaged based on various fields of expertise to debate and discuss various courses of action and make recommendations. They can be useful at different stages of an evaluation and can take place live, which poses logistical challenges if experts are busy or widespread, or remotely, as in the case of the Delphi Technique.
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).
This option involves facilitating independent feedback from particular individual stakeholders.
This option involves facilitating group stakeholder feedback sessions on evaluation findings.
This option involves facilitating a review of the evaluation by an external expert or anonymous reviewer.
This option involves facilitating a discussion of the findings amongst the beneficiaries of a project to provide feedback on the evaluation findings.
An expert review involves experts reviewing the evaluation, drawing in part on their expertise and experience of the particular type of program or project.
Reviewing the evaluation by using peers from within the organisation or outside of the organisation
