Ratna M. Sudarshan, ISST
Evaluations have been carried out at the end of Phase I and towards the end of Phase II; brief review of key issues raised through these evaluations Outline of the approach proposed for the current evaluation
State HDRs in India, (Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh) 2005 Evaluation of national HDR system, UNDP Evaluation Office 2006 GOI-UNDP project on SSPHD, (Shri B.K.Bhattacharya) 2008 Documenting the policy impact of HDRs in India, (Pia Lindström) 2010 UNDP India Mid-term review of the Country Programme Action Plan (kalyani Menon Sen and A.K. Shiva Kumar) 2010 Project results assessment 2010
POSITIVES: The programme has contributed to enhanced awareness, has had an influence on policies and programmes, and on financial allocations Capacity for analysis has been strengthened within and outside the government
CHALLENGES Danger of ‘report fatigue’: However, value in having deeper analysis around priority concerns and in re-visiting important themes Human development gets seen as synonymous with 3 sectors (health, education, livelihood) – intra sectoral and agency approach missing
Dissemination weak (taking the message to the people and follow up strategy to preparation of reports) eg - contribution of reports to policy debate and public action - generation of a range of outputs for different audiences - screening of films
Community level participatory monitoring tools, engagement with CSO’s on HD More State cross sharing activities would help There has been some gap between expectation from resource institutions and their understanding of their role
Evaluation confirm the value of the HD approach, and its continued relevance While mainstreaming of the approach is essential, sometimes mainstreaming can lead to invisibility and hence there may be need for continued ‘championing’ of the approach
Activities/ inputs Outputs (eg reports, films, training) Outcomes (short term long term) (policies, programmes, resource allocations)
Data collection: Review of a sample of the reports and films Visit to 5 states (Kerala, Himachal, Rajasthan, MP, WB) Interviews with all stakeholders including representatives of UNDP and Planning Commission State Government officials in charge of the programme Resource agencies – national, state, district level Researchers, NGOs, media ‘Bystanders’
Assessment criteria Relevance Effectiveness Efficiency Impact Sustainability Way forward