Evaluation in the Relex family European Commission Joint Evaluation Unit EuropeAid, DG Relex, DG Dev Evaluation in the Relex family Jean Louis Chomel EuropeAid/ Head of the Evaluation Unit http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/evaluation/index.htm

Mandate Evaluation will be given a higher profile Evaluation of individual projects is a function integral to the project cycle and as such is a core task of EuropeAid. However, evaluation of the results of regional and sectoral policies, programmes and programming performance is crucial to the success of external assistance policies as a whole, and needs to feed back into the programming cycle. To ensure objectivity, this level of evaluation should be carried out independently and serve as a feedback to the services responsible for policy, programming and implementation. The evaluation service will be accountable to the Group of RELEX Commissioners. The Group will decide on the work programme of the evaluation service and act on its reports and recommendations. Madrid, 19 October 2006

Organigram CABINET CABINET FOCAL POINT FOCAL POINT FOCAL POINT Commissioner B. FERRERO-WALDNER Responsible for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy and EuropeAid Commissioner L. MICHEL Responsible for Development and Humanitarian Aid CABINET CABINET coordination DG RELEX E. LANDABURU EUROPEAID K. RICHELLE DG DEV S. MANSERVISI FOCAL POINT FOCAL POINT FOCAL POINT EVALUATION UNIT Madrid, 19 October 2006

Pluriannual programme 2002-2006 3 AXES : Modality of implementation Geographical Thematic/sectoral Madrid, 19 October 2006

Pluriannual programme 2002-2006 OTHER ACTIVITIES : Methodology Networks: European Heads of Evaluation Services DAC/OECD Evaluation units within European Commission ROM (results oriented monitoring) Training / Communication Madrid, 19 October 2006

Country and Regional Evaluations Year of publication Countries Regions 2003 Ukraine Maroc Bangladesh Malawi MEDA (Economic Co-operation) 2004 Egypt Honduras Ethiopia Lesotho MERCOSUR CARDS EAR 2005 Benin Ghana Caraïbes Latin America 2006 Armenia Tanzania Mali (joint evaluation) Mauritius, Seychelles & Comores Rwanda TACIS Central Africa 2007 (foreseen) India China Jordan Bolivia Moldova Mozambique Guyana Pacific SADC Central America West Africa Eastern Africa Madrid, 19 October 2006

Sectoral and Thematic Evaluations Year of publication Themes / sectors / modalities 2003 Réhabilitation et reconstruction Gender Basic Education (joint evaluation) 2004 Population Transport Trade-Related Assistance Food Aid / Food Security Environment & Forest 2005 Private Sector 2006 Trade capacity building General Budget Support (joint evaluation) Governance Water and sanitation Micro projects Rural Development 2007 (foreseen) Statistical Support Energy United Nations Development Banks and EIB Civil Society Madrid, 19 October 2006

GEOGRAPHICAL EVALUATIONS Main results GEOGRAPHICAL EVALUATIONS Relevance is in general good both with EU policies and partner needs Impacts are observed, but limited when partner Government is not or insufficiently involved. Efficiency is the weakest part : cumbersome procedures, length and huge delay EC visibility is uneven. EC coordination of EU or other donors is commanded. Complementarity between donors is weak. Sustainability is difficult to assess on several programming cycles. Madrid, 19 October 2006

THEMATIC AND SECTORAL EVALUTIONS Main results THEMATIC AND SECTORAL EVALUTIONS In general, actions are relevant but have limited impacts because of too general guidelines, not adapted to the country context and the institutional environment. Gap between the strategic orientations in Headquarters and the implementation in the field, especially for the most intangible topics as environment, gender or governance. The transfer of good pratice from one region (country) to another is not systematic (especially between ACP and non ACP) The approach to a sector has to be linked to a more global view: e.g. how to link a sector to poverty reduction (transport, trade, private sector) Madrid, 19 October 2006

SOME EXAMPLES OF USE OF EVALUATION Feedback SOME EXAMPLES OF USE OF EVALUATION GEOGRAPHICAL SECTORAL / THEMATIC Lesotho Bangladesh/Ukraine/ Egypt Latin America Tanzania / Rwanda Mali Gender Governance Trade capacity building Budget support Madrid, 19 October 2006

Conditions for the use of evaluation Usefulness depends on Credibility which relies on Quality Of the Terms of reference Of the evaluation process Of the evaluation report Of the dissemination and feedback Transparency of the process Explanation of the methodology Involvement of the stakeholders Seminar Publication on the web site Madrid, 19 October 2006

Methodological approach For a complex evaluation: Limit the number of evaluation questions Define the judgement criterion(a) (if possible with targeted sucess level) Develop focussed indicators Give answers to the evaluative questions and give an overall assessment of the geographical or thematic programmes Madrid, 19 October 2006