2.4. Evaluation roles and responsibilities
There are many decisions to be made in an evaluation including:
- the focus of the evaluation (including the key evaluation questions)
- choosing the evaluator/evaluation team
- approving the evaluation design
- approving the evaluation report(s) and who can access them.
BetterEvaluation’s Manager’s Guide to evaluation encourages consideration of who will be involved in making these decisions, what their role will be and how the decisions will be made[1]:
Who?
Contributors to involve in the decision-making process may include:
- the program manager within the agency
- an evaluation steering committee
- a technical advisory group or a number of individual technical advisors (including service providers)
- a community consultation committee or relevant people from the community.
What?
The role of each individual or group in relation to specific decisions can be categorised as follows:
- to consult: those whose opinions are sought (bilateral)
- to recommend: those who are responsible for putting forward a suitable answer to the decision.
- to approve: those who are authorised to approve a recommendation.
- to inform: those who are informed after the decision has been made (unilateral).
How?
One or more of the following processes may be employed in the decision-making process:
- Decisions made based on support from the majority. Where decisions may be contentious it is important to be clear about who is eligible to vote and whether proxy votes are allowed.
- Decisions made based on reaching a consensus. In practical terms, that can mean giving all decision makers the right to veto.
- Decisions made based on hierarchy (formal positions of authority).
Evaluation managers are often, but not always, the program manager. For large evaluations, the evaluation manager may be assisted by one or more staff members with specific responsibilities in the management process.
Table 7: Potential evaluation roles and responsibilities
Area/Committee | Responsibility |
---|---|
Program manager |
|
[Program name] Evaluation Steering Committee |
|
Evaluator |
|
DTF |
|
[1] M. K. Gugerty, D. Karlan, The Goldilocks Challenge: Right Fit Evidence for the Social Sector, New York, Oxford University Press, 2018.
Last updated: 14 December 2020
Give feedback about this page.
Share this page:
URL copied!