Fourth CLEAR Global Forum in Mexico City THEME 1: The role of civil society in the accountability of public policies and the institutionalization of Evaluation systems Influence, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme November 17th, 2013

► About CIPPEC ► About Argentina’s evaluation context ► CIPPEC’s evaluation strategy ► Fostering institutionalization ► Strengthening public policies evaluation ► Improving CIPPEC’s own approach to evaluation ► What we learnt so far? Agenda

About CIPPEC

► Since 2000, CIPPPEC is a bridge that links high quality independent research in different public policies areas with public policies implementation at national, provincial and local levels. ► CIPPEC “understands the politics behind policies”. Programmatic approach Social Development EducationHealth Social Protection Economic Development Fiscal Policy Global Integration and Productive Develop- ment Institutional Strenghtening Justice and Transpar- ency Gov Manage- ment Influence, M&E Local Develop- ment

The national evaluation context Fragmented and non systematic approach depending more on actors’ will rather than in government enforcement for evaluation Executive Power Efforts since the `80 towards program and plan evaluations specially in Education and Labor sectors Legislative Power Runs the National Audit Agency with responsibility in the field of operational evaluation Judicial Power Designs and develops some public policies but without evaluation criteria yet Provincies Heterogeneous scenarios among the 24 jurisdictions with some relevant leaders aiming to reach the next level

CIPPEC’s contribution: mainstreaming evaluation approach Fostering institutionalization Strengthening Public Policies evaluation Improving CIPPEC’s own approach to evaluation

PROGRAMA DE INCIDENCIA, MONITOREO Y EVALUACIÓN Fostering institutionalization Contributing to the local debate Influencing decision makers Networking with Cabinet`s Chief Ministry Empowering civil society

CIPPEC’s contribution: mainstreaming evaluation approach Fostering institutionalization Strengthening Public Policies evaluation Improving CIPPEC’s own approach to evaluation

Strengthening public policies evaluation at regional and national levels Evaluability assessments Institutional evaluations Impact and outcome evaluations

PROGRAMA DE INCIDENCIA, MONITOREO Y EVALUACIÓN Strengthening public policies evaluation at regional and national levels Eurosocial Evaluating impact evaluations policy impact and uptake Under what circumstances and how can IEs best contribute to effective development policy and practice? Impact evaluations will be more influential if they are carried out in an enable environment for knowledge to policy interface Cohesion Promotes wide policy dialogue on cohesion Tool Institutional cooperation Sharing experiences Technical assistance Focus Knowledge from social policies Support to evaluation institutions (Chile, Guatemala, Uruguay)

Data visualization: social protection witness indicators

CIPPEC’s contribution: mainstreaming evaluation approach Fostering institutionalization Strengthening Public Policies evaluation Improving CIPPEC’s own approach to evaluation

Think tanks’ evaluation Influence M&E Impact Sectoral evaluations

Actors I,M&E | Evaluabilidad de planes y programas Actores Organismos internacionales IIP, OSC y Agencias estatales Provincias Argentinas CIPPEC

Products Activities Impact Results Levels People’s performance Organizational performance Organizational performance Sectoral impact Institutional Impact in Public Policies Institutional Impact in Public Policies External evaluation as per Board’s strategic orientation Self + management individual evaluation Self + management individual evaluation Prorammes’ self + Management Evaluation Prorammes’ self + Management Evaluation Objectives Competenci es Challenges and opportinities Addressing programs contribution to CIPPEC’s mission Projects’ Monitoring Projects’ Monitoring PEAP CG de inicio CG de seguimiento CG de cierre Achievements Relevance and influence Quantitative and financial indicators Quality Planni ng CIPPEC’s own M&E system

I,M&E | Evaluabilidad de planes y programas What we learnt so far? About the context: Polarized political scenarios is about the government taking leading role in all fronts Development context sets a limit to evaluation development About our role: Think tanks are perceived as knowledge brokers or institutionalization advocates but not necessarily as independent evaluators No financing for our own evaluation About evaluation itself: consensus is slowly arising within civil society but resistance to measurement remains active About who evaluates?: universities are being positioned as independent evaluators Evaluation culture in Argentina is still a challenge

Natalia Aquilino Influence, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme Director Thank you Programa de Incidencia, Monitoreo & Evaluación