Evaluating the impact of knowledge brokering work

“Analysis of an e-discussion on the Knowledge Brokers’ Forum . Available as pdf.

by Catherine Fisher, Impact and Learning Team, Institute of Development Studies , January 2012

Introduction…

“This paper summarises a rich discussion about how to evaluate the impact of Knowledge Brokering work that took place on the Knowledge Brokers Forum during October and November 2011.  The debate aimed to share members experience and insights about evaluating impact in order to be better able to evaluate our own work and build greater understanding of the potential of the sector.   This summary aims to draw together the richness of the discussion, bring together themes and identify emerging areas of consensus and ideas for action.   ”

CONTENTS
1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
2. Understanding the purpose of your work is the basis for evaluation ……………………………………………….. 3
3. Be clear why you are evaluating your work ………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
4 .Understand what you mean by impact ………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
5. The challenge of indicators and metrics ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
6. Methodologies and approaches ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 8
7. Looking forwards ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
8. Statistics and feedback about e-discussion…………………………………………………………………………………..10
9. Contributors………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10

See also:  Background note for e-discussion on evaluating the impact of knowledge, by brokering work, October 2011, Catherine Fisher.

 

Conference: Measuring Impact of Higher Education for Development

From: Monday 19th March 2012 to Tuesday 20th March 2012

Venue:  Birkbeck College, Malet Street, London

Organisers: London International Development Centre (LIDC); Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU)

Background: Higher education for international development has been, in recent years, a neglected area relative to other educational interventions. Yet higher education (HE) is necessary for the attainment of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and for economic development in low and middle income countries.

There is a long history of development assistance interventions in HE to support development goals, directed at strengthening individual, organisational and institutional capacity. These have included scholarship programmes as well as support to specific universities and university networks in low and middle income countries, and support to academic research and training partnerships.
However, there has been little comparison of these different interventions in terms of their international development impact. This limits our understanding of “what works” in HE interventions for development, and our ability to invest effectively in future.
The aim of this two-day international conference is to examine the current status of impact evaluation for HE interventions and to identify research gaps and needs for the future. The conference will focus on three issues:
  • What has been, and should be, the development intention of HE interventions?
  • How should development impacts be measured?
  • What is our experience with measurement methods and tools to date, where are the gaps and what research priorities emerge?

The programme will be posted online soon.

Who should attend:

The conference will bring together experts from three research sectors: higher education, international development and impact evaluation from academia, think tanks, government agencies and civil society organisations. PhD students are welcome if their research is relevant to the theme of the conference.

Registration is open between 2 February and 5 March 2012.
To register, please fill in and return the registration form.
Attendance is free of charge.

Evaluation and Assessment of Poverty and Conflict Interventions (EAPC)

[from the MercyCorps website]

“A significant body of knowledge exists on the relationship between poverty and conflict. Research has shown that low per capita income and slow economic growth drastically increase the chances that a country will experience violence. Driven in part by these findings, donors and their partners are implementing increasing numbers of economic development programs in conflict and post-conflict environments, based on the assumption that these will contribute to both poverty reduction and conflict management.”

“To test this assumption, Mercy Corps implemented the USAID-funded Evaluation and Assessment of Poverty and Conflict Interventions (EAPC) research project. Over the 18 month life of the project, Mercy Corps worked with its field teams in Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Uganda to 1) develop indicators and data collection tools, 2) field test these indicators and tools, and 3) begin to assess several theories of change that inform Mercy Corps’ programs.”

“Findings from the research project are shared in three key documents:
Conflict & Economics: Lessons Learned on Measuring Impact, a summary of learning about M&E in conflict-affected environments, including indicator menus and data collection tools.
A case study highlighting findings from Uganda.
A case study highlighting findings from Indonesia.

Please contact Jenny Vaughan at jvaughan@bos.mercycorps.org for further information.”

UK Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) – online consultation

ICAI website text:

“The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) is the independent body responsible for the scrutiny of UK aid, focusing on delivery of value for money for the UK taxpayer, maximising the impact for recipients and ensuring effectiveness of the UK aid budget. ICAI reports to Parliament through the International Development Select Committee.

ICAI is currently running a consultation calling for members of the public to have their say on which areas of UK overseas aid they would like to see looked at. Responses to the consultation will assist ICAI to develop its work plan for the next three years. To respond to the consultation please visit www.independent.gov.uk/icai/consultation.” [where you will find an online survey  with suppporting background information on DFID]

“The deadline for the consultation is the 7th April 2011.

For enquiries about the ICAI consultation please contact Clare Robathan, Communications and Research Officer on 020 7023 6734, or c-robathan@icai.independent.gov.uk

RD comment:  Re the online survey used for the consultation, this is by no means the best designed online survey I have ever seen, but please make use of it. The survey is also available as a downloadable pdf.

The ICAI website has some basic problems. While there is a Contact Us page there is no comment facility at on any of the pages, as far as I can see. Nor is there a no disclosure/transparency policy. You can ask for the results of the survey via the enquiries email address, but they could be immediately available right now, because the website is using SurveyMonkey.com. Referring to the three newly appointed commissioners, the website says “The three Commissioners, Mark Foster, John Githongo and Diana Good are acknowledged leaders in their fields. Together they contribute a wealth of international experience in the private sector, in combating corruption and in development.” Yet, as far as I can see, none of the commisioners has any significant evaluation experience. Yet they are responsible for contracting an organisation (or group of organisations) to do evaluation work on behalf of the ICAI. In doing so they will need to secure value for money, which requires assessing both value as well as money spent.  I think we should watch the performance of this commission quite carefully.

PS 15th February 2011: Visitors may be interested to read the ICAI Terms of Reference 2010 for the evaluation functions being contracted out by the ICAI, and the supporting documentation, the Independent Commission for Aid Impact-Presentation-for-pre-bid-meeting, made by DFID on 22 November 2010

Impact Evaluation Conference: “Mind the Gap”: From Evidence to Impact

Date: June 15-17 2011
Venue: Cuernavaca, Mexico

Each year billions of dollars are spent on tackling global poverty. Development programs and policies are designed to build sustainable livelihoods and improve lives. But is there real evidence to show which programs work and why? Are government and donor policies based on concrete and credible evidence?

The Mind the Gap conference on impact evaluation will address these questions and offer possible solutions. With a focus on Latin American Countries the conference will take place in Cuernavaca, Mexico, June 15-17, 2011. Co-hosted by The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), the National Institute of Public Health of Mexico (INSP), the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and the Center for Labor and Social Distributive Studies in coordination with the Impact Evaluation Network and the Poverty and Economic Policy Network (CEDLAS-IEN-PEP).

This conference will provide a platform to share and discuss experiences on how to best achieve evidence-based policy in sectors that are highly relevant for Latin America. To this end, the conference will mainstream a policy-focus into all its activities. The plenary sessions will address the challenges and progress made in building evidence into policy-making processes. The sector-focused sessions will be asked to address the engagement of stakeholders and policy-makers in the various studies presented. The conference will be preceded by a range of pre-conference clinics tailored to the interests and needs of both researchers and program managers.

The conference will accommodate only 400 attendees. The official languages of the Conference are Spanish and English. Simultaneous translation will be provided for all conference sessions.Please register early to secure your attendance. Registration will open March 1st. 2011. Early bird rates will be offered.

Check the conference website often for up to date conference information.  http://www.impactevaluation2011.org/

Bursaries are being made available to developing country participants with a proven interest in impact evaluation.

Bursary applications will open March 1st giving preference to authors of accepted abstracts.

Does Research Reduce Poverty? Assessing the welfare impact of policy-orientated research in agriculture

ALINe publication: Sumner, A., Masset, E. and Mulmi, R. (2010) IDS Practice Paper, under review. Available online

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the current context of the global financial crisis and its aftermath, development resources are likely to be getting scarcer. Resources for development research are too. The set of circumstances generating the resource scarcity is also putting pressure on development gains. More than ever before, every dollar spent on development will have to count towards sustainable poverty reduction as will every dollar spent on development research. However, understanding the impacts of development research on policy change and on poverty is weak at best, with agriculture being no different.

The area of research impact is not a new area of enquiry but an emergent one. Our paper seeks to build on the work of others, notably, IFPRI, CGIAR, IDRC, ODI RAPID, GDN, NR International and ECDPM. In our paper we survey the literature and identify different ways of assessing the impact of ‘policy-oriented’ research. We then take the available literature on agriculture as a specific focus to survey.

Our paper surveys the different types of ‘policy-oriented’ research; the literature on the ‘theories of change’ for policy research in international development; methodologies for analysing the impact of policy-oriented research; the relevant agriculture literature and outlines the types indicators that can be used for impact assessment of research with examples.

The key findings are:

  • There is no standard practice for the evaluation of research projects and every evaluation strategy should be designed on a case-by-case basis.
  • Provided we are willing to accept some assumptions, it is possible to test research project impacts along some dimensions of social welfare (agricultural output, income or poverty) by finding the appropriate indicators (and methodology). The overall goal – welfare impacts of research – is highly desirable but not always feasible (especially so due to time-lags).
  • When a welfare assessment of research projects is not feasible, it is recommended that evaluators test intermediate project outcomes. The articulation of the theory of change of the project allows testing critical links in the causal chain running from research to welfare.


Measuring Results for Dutch Development Aid, Approaches and Future Directions

Date: October 4-7, 2010
Venue: Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam,

The International Institute of Social Studies and The Amsterdam Institute for International Development invite applications / submissions for a training and conference event on Measuring Results for Dutch Development Aid, Approaches and Future Directions with financial support from the Policy and Operations Evaluation Department of the Dutch Ministry of Development Cooperation.

Participation is free of charge, but places are limited.
Deadline for applications: September 10, 2010
Click here to apply

Objectives: Share results from and experiences with impact evaluation in developing countries, and discuss their relevance for Dutch development cooperation.

Target Audiences: Researchers, NGOs, consulting companies and policy makers in the Netherlands conducting or using impact evaluation to study the effectiveness of development assistance.

Confirmed speakers: Dr. Howard White, director of International Initiative for Impact Evaluation(3ie).
Dr. Paul Gertler, Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley.
Dr. Sulley Gariba, Executive Director, Institute for Policy Alternatives, Ghana.
Prof. Ruerd Ruben, director of the Policy and Operations Evaluation Department of the Dutch Ministry of Development Cooperation (starting Sept 1).

Submit a paper (optional): Contributed papers are sought in the area of (1) completed impact evaluations, (2) reviews of impact evaluations on a particular sector, (3) position papers on approaches to impact evaluations in relation to decision making.

Selection criteria: Quality of submission and/or professional link with result assessment for development assistance and/or participation in the impact evaluation training.

Maximum number of participants: 100

PROGRAM »

%d bloggers like this: