UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

Similar documents
GEROS Evaluation Quality Assurance Tool Version

Section & Overall Rating Highly Satisfactory Satisfactory Fair Unsatisfactory Missing Not Rated Weighting (Score) Implication

Technical Note Integrating Gender in WFP Evaluations

GLOBAL EVALUATION REPORT OVERSIGHT SYSTEM

Indicative content of evaluation final reports Draft, Jérémie Toubkiss, Evaluation Office, NYHQ (updated 4 February 2016)

Evaluation Technical Notes

UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template

Frequently Asked Questions: UN-SWAP Evaluation Performance Indicator Reporting

Guidelines for UNODC Evaluation Terms of Reference

UNICEF Malaysia. Formative Evaluation of Role and Engagement of Business Sector to Respect and Promote Child Rights. ANNEX B- Terms of Reference

EVALUATION OFFICE. Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System (GEROS)

UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template

UNICEF Global Evaluation Report Oversight System (GEROS) Review Template

GUIDELINES FOR INCEPTION REPORTS

PLANNING AND CONDUCT OF EVALUATIONS

Terms of Reference (ToR) End-of-the Programme Evaluation UNDP Support to Inclusive Participation in Governance May 2013

Evaluation Inception Report Draft Template

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE FINAL EVALUATION 1. BACKGROUND: ONE UN S PARTNERSHIP WITH THE GIHUNDWE HOSPITAL

UNICEF Evaluation Office Evaluation of UNICEF s Policy Advocacy Work: Mapping and Scoping Exercise

UNICEF Evaluation Office Terms of Reference: External Assessment of UNICEF s Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System (GEROS)

2. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF OBJECT OF THE EVALUATION

Terms of Reference (TOR)

Country Portfolio Evaluations I. GUIDANCE FOR PROCESS & CONTENT

EVALUATION MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

Terms of Reference for Crisis Management and Recovery Programme Final Evaluation

Guidance: Quality Criteria for Evaluation Reports

How to write a logframe

Terms of Reference (ToR) End-of-the Project Evaluation UNDP Support to the Strategic Capacity Building Initiative

Gender mainstreaming strategy and action plan

PROJECT PREPARATION GRANT (PPG) PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project TYPE OF TRUST FUND: GEF Trust Fund

Executive Board of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women

TERMS OF REFERENCE. Independent Evaluation of the ILO Action Plan for Gender Equality

Evaluation policy PURPOSE

BACKGROUND PAPER FOR THE FIRST INFORMAL CONSULTATION ON THE WFP GENDER POLICY ( ) Informal Consultation

United Nations Development Programme GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATORS CONTENTS

UNFPA-UNICEF Global Programme to Accelerate Action to End Child Marriage. Evaluability Assessment. Final Draft Terms of Reference

WHO reform. WHO evaluation policy

UNICEF Plan for Global Evaluations. Highlights of the Plan

TERMS OF REFERENCE Review of the Joint UNDP and UN Women programme Inclusive development and empowerment of Women in Rakhine State

Terms of Reference (ToR)

Joint Evaluation of Joint Programmes on Gender Equality in the United Nations System Management Response

IAS EVALUATION POLICY

Independent Evaluation Office Review of the Quality Assessment Of 2016 Decentralized Evaluations

Country Portfolio Evaluations I. GUIDANCE FOR PROCESS & CONTENT

Terms of Reference (TOR)

Gender Mainstreaming in Project Cycle Management

Module 5: Project Evaluation in

Terms of Reference (ToR)

Strategic Evaluations I. GUIDANCE FOR PROCESS & CONTENT

UNICEF GEROS Meta-Analysis 2015

Monitoring and Evaluation Policy

Terms of Reference (TOR) Evaluation of UN Volunteers intervention ( ) in the Tonle Sap Conservation Project

Evaluation Terms of Reference Template

Module 3. Action developing gender-responsive. responsive action. 29 Nov 2006 Department of Gender, Women and Health

ESCAP M&E SYSTEM Monitoring & Evaluation System Overview and Evaluation Guidelines

Management response to the annual report for 2017 on the evaluation function in UNICEF

Making the choice: Decentralized Evaluation or Review? (Orientation note) Draft for comments

Call for concept notes

DIAKONIA TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR BASELINE SURVEY CONSULTANCY PROCUREMENT REFERENCE NUMBER: DK/CONS/09/001/2015

Terms of Reference Consultant to Facilitate Development a Save the Children Kenya Country Strategy

THEORY OF CHANGE UNDAF CAMPANION GUIDANCE UNDAF COMPANION GUIDANCE: THEORY OF CHANGE

Guide for Misereor partner organisations on commissioning external evaluations locally

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Programme reporting standards for sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health

Concept note: ISPA Quality Assurance Protocols August 22, 2016

Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Population Fund and the United Nations Office for Project Services

Terms of Reference for a Gender Analysis

EUROPEAN COMMISSION. The Programming Period European Regional Development Fund. European Social Fund. Cohesion Fund

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME TERMS OF REFERENCE

Management perspective on the 2014 annual report on the evaluation function

Terms of Reference (ToR)

Terms of Reference. Final Evaluation ALERT Project

Terms of reference Evaluator for mid-term review of 4.5-year EuropeAid Grant Agreement

C-18: Checklist for Assessing USAID Evaluation Reports

Presentation of UN Women Evaluation Policy Second Regular Session of the Executive Board. 30 November 2012

UNICEF Evaluation Management Response 1

An independent review of ILO Global Supply Chains interventions undertaken between with a focus on lessons learned, what works and why

UNICEF Evaluation Management Response

UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN'S FUND (UNICEF) CALL FOR INSTITUTIONAL EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST (EOI)

Summative Evaluation Guidelines for Jobs Fund Partners

1 UN Women strategic plan, , paragraph These include SCR 1820 (2008); 1888 (2009); 1889 (2009) and 1960 (2010).

REQUEST FOR PROJECT PREPARATION GRANT (PPG) PROJECT TYPE: LARGE SIZED PROJECT

Terms of Reference Independent Final Evaluation of Zambia Green Jobs Programme March 2018

INTERNAL AUDIT AND OVERSIGHT DIVISION

Child Rights Programming Checklist For Assessing A Project Proposal & Developing A Project

PROCEDURE AND TOOLS FOR EVALUABILITY REVIEW OF ILO PROJECTS OVER US$5 MILLION

Economic and Social Council

Annex IV: Quality assessment (2014)

Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and of the United Nations Population Fund

GUIDANCE TO ADVANCE GENDER EQUALITY

EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK CHECKLIST AND REVIEW TEMPLATE

GUIDANCE TO ADVANCE GENDER EQUALITY

Assessing the Development Effectiveness of Multilateral Organizations: Guidance on the Methodological Approach

Introduction to the INGO Forum Strategic Objectives July 2014 through June General Objectives... 3 Values and Principles...

A Common Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) Framework. GESI Working Group, IDPG 2017

Call for concept notes

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE FINAL EVALUATION OF HAKI MKONONI RIGHTS IN OUR HANDS

Terms of Reference. Corporate Evaluation of UN-Women contribution to United Nations system coordination on gender equality and women s empowerment

Terms of Reference (TOR)

Norms and Standards for Evaluation

Transcription:

EVALUATION OFFICE UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference UNICEF/UNI164247/Johansen Updated June 2017

CONTENTS Introduction... 2 1. Evaluation Object... 3 2. Evaluation Purpose... 3 3. Evaluation Objectives... 4 4. Evaluation Scope... 4 5. Evaluation Context... 4 6. Evaluation Criteria... 5 7. Evaluation Framework... 5 8. Methodology... 6 9. Evaluation Work Plan... 7 10. Gender and Human Rights, including child rights... 7 1 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

INTRODUCTION A Terms of Reference (ToR) is a plan or blueprint outlining the key elements of the purpose, scope, process and products of an evaluation, including management and technical aspects as necessary. Developing a ToR is a critical early step in any assessment, survey, research or evaluation. In the narrowest sense, it is the basis for contractual arrangements with external consultants, though it should first be developed as a means of clarifying expectations, roles and responsibilities among different stakeholders, providing the plan for overall activity, including follow-up. The time and effort spent in preparing a good ToR has big returns on the quality relevance and usefulness of the product. ToRs are important: For all stakeholders as they explain the agreed expectations in terms of the parameters and process of the exercise, and are a guide to each stakeholder s specific role; For the evaluation team as they ensure that expectations are clear and the objectives are met; For external and internal teams as external teams may require more detail on background context and on intended audiences and uses; internal teams may simply need to clarify the parameters of the assignment. ToRs are often developed in stages. In programme evaluation, stakeholders will focus on the details on purpose and evaluation questions. A further developed version used for recruiting external consultants requires more detail on existing information sources, team composition, procedures and products, but may describe methodology and a calendar of activities only in broad terms. The ToR may then be further refined once an evaluation team is on board, with a careful review of the purpose and key questions and corresponding elaboration of the methodology. 2 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

UNICEF- Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference Evaluation Title: Commissioning Office: 1. EVALUATION OBJECT 1.0 The Terms of Reference describes the object of the evaluation. 1.1 The ToR provides a clear and relevant description of the intervention, including: location(s), timelines, cost/budget, and implementation status. 1.2 The ToR provides a clear and relevant description of the stakeholders intended to be benefited or influenced by the intervention, by type (i.e., institutions/organizations; communities; individuals ), by geographic location(s) (i.e., urban, rural, particular neighborhoods, town/cites, sub-regions ) and in terms of numbers reached (as appropriate to the purpose of the evaluation). 1.3 The ToR gives a description of the relative importance of the object to UNICEF (e.g. in terms of size, influence, or positioning). 1.4 The results framework, logframe or description of the intervention's intended results are provided; including outlining the intervention logic as a coherent theory of change (where no theory of change is available, the need for the evaluation to reconstruct a theory of change is clearly stated). 1.5 The ToR identifies the main implementing agency(ies), development partners, primary duty bearers, secondary duty bearers, and rights holders; it notes the specific contributions and roles of key stakeholders (financial or otherwise), including UNICEF. 1.6 The ToR includes an assessment of relevant human rights, including child rights and gender equality, aspects of the evaluation object. 2. EVALUATION PURPOSE 2.0 The Terms of Reference specifies the purpose of the evaluation and how it will be used. 2.1 The ToR states the type of evaluation according to UNICEF policy (formative, summative, combined, meta-evaluation). 2.2 The ToR clearly states why the evaluation is being done, including justification for why it is being done at this time, in terms of what it is expected to achieve or contribute to. 2.3 The ToR identifies the primary and secondary audiences for the evaluation and how the evaluation will be useful for these audiences. 2.4 The ToR indicates both duty bearers and rights holders (particularly women and other groups subject to discrimination) as primary users of the evaluation and how they will be involved in the evaluation process. 3 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

3. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES 3.0 The Terms of Reference includes clearly defined, relevant and feasible objectives. 3.1 The ToR gives a clear and complete description of what the evaluation seeks to achieve by the end of the process in order to achieve the overall purpose. 3.2 The ToR evaluation objectives are realistic and achievable, in light of the information that can be collected in the context of the undertaking. 4. EVALUATION SCOPE 4.0 The Terms of Reference includes the scope of the evaluation. 4.1 The ToR explicitly and clearly defines what will and will not be covered (thematically, chronologically, geographically with key terms defined), as well as the reasons for this scope. 4.2 The scope of the evaluation is adequate to meet the stated evaluation objective(s). 4.3 The scope of the evaluation is feasible given resources and time considerations. 5. EVALUATION CONTEXT 5.0 The Terms of Reference includes sufficient and relevant contextual information that supports understanding of the evaluation object and purpose. 5.1 The ToR gives clear and relevant description of the context of the intervention (policy, socioeconomic, political, institutional, international factors relevant to the implementation of the intervention). 5.2 The ToR provides a clear and relevant description (where appropriate) of the status and needs of the target groups for the intervention. 5.3 The ToR adequately describes the most relevant programmatic and/or thematic aspects relevant to the evaluation; and how the context relates to the implementation of the intervention. 5.4 The ToR includes an assessment of relevant human rights, including child rights and gender equality, aspects of the context. 4 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

6. EVALUATION CRITERIA 6.0 The Terms of Reference specifies the criteria that will be utilized to guide the evaluation. 6.1 The ToR specifies the evaluation criteria against which the subject to be evaluated will be assessed, including, for example, relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and/or sustainability, human rights based approach, and results based management. 6.2 The ToR spells out any additional criteria of relevance to the particular type of evaluation being undertaken, such as evaluations of development, humanitarian response, and normative programmes. 6.3 The evaluation criteria are defined taking account of equity, human rights and gender equality. Optionally, the ToR includes a standalone criterion on human rights, equity or gender equality. 7. EVALUATION FRAMEWORK 7.0 The Terms of Reference includes a comprehensive and tailored evaluation framework including evaluation criteria, questions and required indicators. 7.1 The ToR provides a set of relevant evaluation criteria that are explicitly justified as appropriate for the purpose of the evaluation (e.g. OECD-DAC/UNEG criteria relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impact; and coverage, coordination and coherence in humanitarian evaluations). 7.2 The evaluation contains a set of evaluation questions that are directly related to both the objectives of the evaluation and the criteria against which the subject will be assessed; these add further detail to the objectives and contribute to further defining the scope. 7.3 The set of evaluation questions is comprehensive enough that they raise the most pertinent evaluation questions, while at the same time being concise enough to provide users with a clear overview of the evaluation s objectives. 7.4 Factoring in the information that will be collected and the context of the evaluation, evidence backed answers to the set of evaluation questions is achievable. 7.5 The ToR mainstreams equity and human rights, including child rights and gender equality, through the description of the evaluation questions and indicators. 5 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

8. METHODOLOGY 8.0 The Terms of Reference guides the methods for data collection and analysis, including information on the proposed (or required) overall methodological design. 8.1 The ToR contains a clear and complete description of a relevant design and methodological approach that are suitable for the evaluation's purpose, objectives and scope. Examples of approaches include participatory, utilization-focused, theory-based and gender and human rights responsive. Examples of overall design include qualitative, quasi-experimental and experimental. 8.2 Existing information sources, such as monitoring systems and/or previous evaluations are identified. An appraisal of quality and reliability is provided. 8.3 The data collection and analysis methods in the ToR are sufficiently rigorous to assess the subject of the evaluation and ensure a complete, fair and unbiased assessment. For example, there will be sufficient data to address all evaluation questions. 8.4 The evaluation methodology includes multiple methods (triangulation); preferably with analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data and with a range of stakeholders covered by the data collection methods. 8.5 Logical and explicit linkages are provided between data sources, data collection methods and analysis methods. For example, sampling plans are included. 8.6 The evaluation methodology takes into account the overall purpose of the evaluation, as well as the needs of the users and other stakeholders. 8.7 The evaluation methodology explicitly and clearly states the limitations of the chosen evaluation methods. 8.8 The ToR specifies that the evaluation will follow UNEG norms and standards for evaluations (N&S), as well as ethical guidelines. It provides hyperlinks to the N&S and to the ethical guidelines. 8.9 The ToR specifies an evaluation approach and data collection and analysis methods that are human rights based, including child rights based and gender sensitive, and for evaluation data to be disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, age, disability, etc. 6 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

9. EVALUATION WORK PLAN 9.0 The Terms of Reference includes a proposed work plan. 9.1 The ToR work plan describes the key stages of the evaluation process and the implementation time line. Consider for example meetings, consultations, workshops with different groups of stakeholders, key points of interaction with a steering committee, process for verification of findings with key stakeholders, presentation of preliminary findings and recommendations. 9.2 The ToR work plan provides a list of deliverables/products that will be submitted by the evaluation team. The ToR states that the evaluation report must be compliant with UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Evaluation Report Standards (updated version of 2017). 9.3 The ToR establishes clear governance arrangements, roles and responsibilities for evaluation team members, the reference group, the commissioning organization and other stakeholders in the evaluation process. 9.4 The ToR describes the evaluation quality assurance process. 9.5 The ToR work plan describes the process, if any, for obtaining and incorporating evaluation comments on a draft evaluation report. It identifies the role of stakeholders in formulating recommendations (if any). 9.6 The ToR work plan includes an evaluation project budget and/or expected level of effort. 9.7 The ToR defines the level of expertise needed among the evaluation team on gender equality and human rights, including child rights, and their responsibilities in this regard and calls for a gender balanced and culturally diverse team that makes use of national/regional evaluation expertise. 10. GENDER AND HUMAN RIGHTS, INCLUDING CHILD RIGHTS 10.0 The Terms of Reference specifies how equity and Human Rights, including child rights and gender equality, will be incorporated in the evaluation design. 10.1 The ToR spells out the relevant instruments or policies on human rights, including child rights and gender equality that will guide the evaluation process. 10.2 The ToR provides a hyperlink to UNEG Guidance on Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluation, and the UN-SWAP Evaluation Performance Indicator. 7 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference

This updated version has been revised to reflect UNEG Norms and Standards (2016) and the GEROS evaluation quality assessment tool (2016). Available at: UNICEF GEROS (www.unicef.org/evaluation/index_geros.html) Evaluation Office UNICEF Three United Nations Plaza New York, New York 10017 United States of America evalhelp@unicef.org www.unicef.org/evaluation 2017 8 UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Terms of Reference