A Manager's Guide to Gender Equality and Human Rights Responsive Evaluation

The manager has overall responsibility for keeping the GE / HR responsive evaluation on track and that can be challenging. However, if the evaluation has been well defined in the ToR, there is a strong reference group and the right resources have been contracted – it has a very good start!

The manager has several key responsibilities in managing the evaluation team, the process and the environment:

Managing the evaluation team – Once recruited the evaluation team needs to have an open and clear line of communication with the manager and this requires time commitment. The manager is accountable to ensure evaluation ethics and standards are met by the evaluator(s), to monitor their progress and make payments against deliverables/results. Supporting the evaluation process will include organising relevant background documentation required by the evaluation team and, with assistance from the reference group, facilitating connections needed by the evaluation team with stakeholders for information and data collection. Interim deliverables are provided to the manager by the evaluation team, for review, comment and suggestions. Some or all of these may then flow to the reference group, as information items or for their input as well. The evaluation team may need the manager’s expertise and familiarity with the programme to address emerging issues as they arise in the collection and analysis of information and data. Final draft reports are also submitted to the manager to manage the flow to the reference group, to coordinate / facilitate input and ultimately accept / approve the final report.

Leading the reference group – It is best to set meetings well in advance, even at start up, if possible. The manager needs to: 1) ensure the evaluation team provides agendas and reference materials for these meetings to all participants at least one week in advance; 2) manage the membership, finding replacements as necessary and keeping the full group informed on evaluation progress and emerging issues; and 3) ensure the group understands and has accepted its role in the evaluation.

Being responsive to the evaluation team and the reference group helps minimize surprises for everyone and lays a foundation of mutual trust and respect. Managers need not have an answer for every question, but they do need to take a lead on getting answers.

Some of the most common risks and necessary actions are:

• Evaluation team proves incompetent or lack GE/HR expertise - remove them, add expertise, or stop the process
• Stakeholders are alientated by the evaluation team - make sure initial communications are set up well; test the team’s sensitivity to cultural, social and local norms
• Confidentialty has not been respected - confidentiality is part of the UNEG standards and must be respected: warn the team as soon as this emerges and follow up as needed.
• Evaluation team does not meet the ToR, but claims they have - this is a contractual agreement, and any change from the ToR has to be agreed by all in advance.
• Time proves too short, budget proves too low – invest time/energy in discussing the ToR during the initial phase; look for ways to modify design, methods or sampling to reduce costs; ask for more money/extension.
• Programme logic was missing – go to the source, reconstruct, or add alternative.
• There is no baseline – invest time/energy in discussing the ToR during the initial phase and re-create the baseline where possible.
• Information is taboo or with-held – provide reassurance about confidentiality; ensure situation in which information is collected is sensitive to cultural norms.
• Information is withheld by the evaluator – ensure the contract is clear about ownership

Tips: Flag (for yourself) when deliverables are due. Consider having interim reporting of findings by the evaluator to the reference group. This can help build their understanding of what is being found in the data collection process and avoid surprises when the draft final report is presented.