- Key Facts
- Board of Governors
- Board of Directors
- Departments and Offices
- Policies and Strategies
- Annual Meetings
- Independent Evaluation
- News & Events
- Data & Research
- Industry and Trade
- Information and Communication Technology
- Public Sector Management
- Social Protection
- Capacity Development
- Climate Change
- Environmental Sustainability
- Gender and Development
- Poverty Reduction
- Private Sector Development
- Regional Cooperation and Integration
- Social Development
- Urban Development
- Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA)
- Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC)
- Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS)
- Indonesia-Malaysia-Thailand Growth Triangle (IMT-GT)
- South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation (SASEC)
- European Representative Office
- Japanese Representative Office
- North American Representative Office
- Pacific Liaison and Coordination Office
- Pacific Subregional Office
Countries with Operations
- China, People's Republic of
- Cook Islands
- Kyrgyz Republic
- Lao PDR
- Marshall Islands
- Micronesia, Federated States of
- Papua New Guinea
Lessons in Evaluation Capacity Development
The Independent Evaluation Department conducted two evaluations on the performance of selected technical assistance (TA) projects focused on evaluation capacity development. These are:
- Evaluation of Selected Technical Assistance Projects in Public Administration in the People's Republic of China
- Technical Assistance Performance Audit Report on Selected Technical Assistance for Strengthening Evaluation Capacity in Developing Member Countries
The chief lessons learned from evaluation of the above interventions are:
The pre-conditions to evaluation capacity development (ECD) success include
- substantive government demand;
- existence of a mandate by decree for evaluation; and
- stability in staffing such that a very high proportion of trained personnel remain in tasks for which they were trained.
- ECD requires a vantage point encompassing data collection in the field to aggregation and analysis by end users via reliable data systems.
- ECD that concentrates on the oversight agency carries the risk that other entities may lack incentives to provide data and information.
- Locating responsibility for M&E near the capable head of an organization can secure the required status, budget, and staff support, and the ability to operate across organizational boundaries.
- To develop staff competency and the confidence to carry out M&E—as opposed to merely creating awareness of its importance and basic knowledge of tools, methods, and approaches—case studies are desirable.
- ECD must take care that M&E systems do not become supply-driven, or too complex or resource intensive to sustain.
- Establishing M&E systems is a means to an end—benefits are obtained when results are used in decision making on strategy, policy, operations, budget, and investment. The design of ECD should include features that encourage, facilitate, and formalize incorporation of results in decision making.