IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cdipxx/v23y2013i1p46-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cordaid's experience with impact evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Francois Lenfant
  • Rens Rutten

Abstract

In 2007, Cordaid started a pilot on participatory impact assessment, intended to enhance accountability and to improve learning. The methodology was based on quasi-experimental design, complemented with qualitative research. This case study illustrates the challenges INGOs and their partners face in their attempt to find a rigorous yet, relevant, useful, and socially acceptable methodology for evaluation and impact assessment purposes. While most local NGOs participating in this pilot consider (parts of) this methodology useful for their learning, this approach proves unsuitable, costly, and inappropriate for an INGO such as Cordaid since it does not respond to its own accountability and learning needs. Cortaid et leur expérience avec l'évaluation d'impact En 2007, Cordaid a lancé un programme pilote sur l’évaluation participative de l'impact, dont l'objectif était d'améliorer la redevabilité et l'apprentissage. La méthodologie se basait sur la conception quasi-expérimentale, assortie de recherches qualitatives. Cette étude de cas illustre les défis que les ONGI et leurs partenaires doivent relever au moment de trouver une méthodologie rigoureuse, mais aussi pertinente, utile et socialement acceptable aux fins des évaluations en général et de celles de l'impact en particulier. Si la plupart des ONG qui prennent part à ce programme pilote considèrent que (certaines parties de) cette méthodologie est (sont) utile(s) pour leur apprentissage, cette approche se révèle inadaptée, coûteuse et peu appropriée pour une ONGI comme Cordaid, car elle ne répond pas à ses propres besoins en matière de redevabilité et d'apprentissage. Cortaid y su experiencia con la evaluación del impacto En 2007, Cordaid inició una experiencia piloto sobre evaluaciones de impacto participativas, cuyo objetivo consistió en mejorar la rendición de cuentas y el aprendizaje. La metodología utilizada se fundamentó en un diseño semiexperimental, que fue complementado con investigaciones cualitativas. El presente estudio de caso ilustra los retos enfrentados por las ONGI y por sus aliados en su intento por encontrar una metodología rigurosa, pertinente, útil y socialmente aceptable para fines de evaluación y de valoración de impacto. Si bien la mayoría de las ONG locales participantes en esta experiencia piloto consideró que esta metodología, o partes de la misma, era útil para su aprendizaje, el método demostró ser inadecuado, costoso e inapropiado para una ONGI como Cordaid, debido a que no atendió sus propias necesidades en las áreas de rendición de cuentas y de aprendizaje. Cortaid e sua experiência com avaliação de impacto Em 2007, a Cordaid iniciou um projeto-piloto sobre avaliação participativa de impacto destinado a melhorar a prestação de contas e aperfeiçoar o aprendizado. A metodologia foi baseada em um modelo quase-experimental, complementado com pesquisa qualitativa. Este estudo de caso ilustra os desafios que as ONGIs e seus parceiros enfrentam em sua tentativa de encontrar uma metodologia rigorosa, porém relevante, útil e socialmente aceitável para fins de avaliação e análise de impacto. Embora a maioria das ONGs locais que participam deste projeto-piloto considere parte dessa metodologia útil para seu aprendizado, essa abordagem mostra-se insustentável, cara e inapropriada para uma ONGI como a Cordaid pois não atende às suas próprias necessidades de prestação de contas e aprendizado.

Suggested Citation

  • Francois Lenfant & Rens Rutten, 2013. "Cordaid's experience with impact evaluation," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 46-56.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cdipxx:v:23:y:2013:i:1:p:46-56
    DOI: 10.1080/09614524.2013.753412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09614524.2013.753412
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09614524.2013.753412?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cdipxx:v:23:y:2013:i:1:p:46-56. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cdip .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.