Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A N N E X 3 – I N C E P T I O N R E P O R T iii) Why is there a tendency for reporting and M+E to focus on activities rather than on results? What is required to change this practice? iv) How are programme results being evaluated throughout the programme (i.e. at various levels from grassroots level to partner, from partner to intermediary/theme level, and from theme level to joint program reporting)? v) Are there effective programme structures that ensure that adequate work is being done in the dimensions of gender and human rights-based approaches? (c) Efficiency Two questions are proposed in relation to efficiency and are to be addressed within this evaluative review. The questions are: i) Is the balance between the need for local partners to have necessary capacity to receive core funds and the interest of intermediaries to disburse funds kept at an adequate level to ensure quality and minimise fiduciary risks? ii) Has the operation of the AGIR programme had the intended effect of allowing the Swedish Embassy officers to spend more time on content and qualitative follow-up with local partner organisations and to be involved in the monitoring of civil society support? Additional questions to be considered are: i) In comparison to similar projects in Mozambique, is this programme efficient in its use of donor funding? (d) Sustainability Two questions are proposed in relation to sustainability and are to be addressed within this evaluative review. The questions are: i) Is it possible (and suitable) to accept more donors into the AGIR programme? ii) What is the level of CSO partnerships that is necessary to sustain the programme? Is there a tipping point where there are too many partners for the programme to remain effective and sustainable? Additional questions to be considered are: i) Is there a point within the AGIR programme when CSOs ‘graduate’ out of the programme? What mechanisms could be put in place to assist CSOs who have graduated out of the programme to allow them to continue their work? (e) Impact Three questions are proposed in relation to sustainability and are to be addressed within this evaluative review. The questions are: i) Is the programme having its intended outcomes – and if not, why? ii) Is the programme likely to produce the expected impacts? Did the focus on national partners have a negative influence on this? iii) What improvements will make the programme more likely to achieve expected outcomes and impact? 99
A N N E X 3 – I N C E P T I O N R E P O R T Additional questions to be considered are: i) What is the relationship between sub-programme content and the achievement of intended outcomes? Are there content areas that are more difficult to work in and therefore prove to be more difficult to achieve results? ii) Can territorial linkages (national, regional, provincial, local) contribute to sustainability? How? What kinds of mechanisms are involved to make this happen? iii) What outcomes have resulted within the programme that can be specifically linked to its work in gender and human rights-based approaches? Are these outcomes unique? Proposed approach and methodlogy Evaluation approach A central perspective taken by this evaluation is that there are multiple ‘spheres of influence’ in the AGIR programme linked together through relationships between donors and intermediaries, intermediaries and partner CSOs, and CSOs and their own partners in the communities in which they work. Given the structure of the AGIR programme (one programme with sub-programme intermediaries partnering with local CSOs) and its focus on capacity strengthening processes, a clear understanding of the different ‘spheres of influence’ within the AGIR programme is necessary to identify and assess outcomes related to the programme approach. While the assessment of each intermediary’s ‘internal’ organisational capacity 53 to undertake its work with its CSO partners can be more directly linked to the support provided by the Swedish Embassy through the AGIR programme, outcomes related to the work of the intermediaries with their CSO partners are more downstream. Identifying and understanding these different ‘spheres of influence’ through a relevant ‘theory of change’ will be necessary to produce a strong evidence-based narrative that plausibly links the contribution of the programme and the work of the intermediary organisations to downstream outcomes at the CSO partner level. As mentioned earlier, documenting these ‘change pathways’ and the linkages they represent between outputs, outcomes and impact will be central to understanding the progress to date of the AGIR programme. These ‘pathways’ exist as a result of the AGIR programme focus on the relationships between the various actors involved in the programme and are critical to its ability to sustain this progress in the near and long-term future. This ‘theory of change’ will be used to stimulate and structure critical reflection about 53 Internal Organisational capacity can consist of many elements from training, to financial management and human resource capacities. In each case, it is the development of the ‘capacity’ the organisation has to support others in a more effective way. 100
Page 1:
2013:3 Kevin Kelpin Vibe Johnsen Jo
Page 4 and 5:
Authors: Kevin Kelpin, Vibe Johnsen
Page 6 and 7:
Abbreviations and Acronyms AAAJC Pa
Page 8 and 9:
Preface This evaluation of AGIR (Ac
Page 10 and 11:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y The
Page 12 and 13:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y CSO
Page 14 and 15:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y imp
Page 16 and 17:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y eff
Page 18 and 19:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y iv)
Page 20 and 21:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y act
Page 22 and 23:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y ges
Page 24 and 25:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y des
Page 26 and 27:
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N ited numb
Page 28 and 29:
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N 1.2 EVALU
Page 30 and 31:
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N Field Vis
Page 32 and 33:
1 I N T R O D U C T I O N aftermath
Page 34 and 35:
2 F I N D I N G S tendency for the
Page 36 and 37:
2 F I N D I N G S ganisations work.
Page 38 and 39:
2 F I N D I N G S jor reason for th
Page 40 and 41:
2 F I N D I N G S This observation
Page 42 and 43:
2 F I N D I N G S 2.3.4 AGIR CSO Pa
Page 44 and 45:
2 F I N D I N G S gender policy, -
Page 46 and 47:
2 F I N D I N G S The mid-term revi
Page 48 and 49:
2 F I N D I N G S 2.4 EFFECTIVENESS
Page 50 and 51:
2 F I N D I N G S be relevant for t
Page 52 and 53: 2 F I N D I N G S the AGIR programm
Page 54 and 55: 2 F I N D I N G S production and qu
Page 56 and 57: 2 F I N D I N G S 2.5 IMPACT OF AGI
Page 58 and 59: 2 F I N D I N G S number of positio
Page 60 and 61: 2 F I N D I N G S Accountability o
Page 62 and 63: 2 F I N D I N G S Through campaign
Page 64 and 65: 2 F I N D I N G S offices, since th
Page 66 and 67: 2 F I N D I N G S Akilizetho has a
Page 68 and 69: 2 F I N D I N G S political partici
Page 70 and 71: 2 F I N D I N G S support the capac
Page 72 and 73: 2 F I N D I N G S The sustained par
Page 74 and 75: 3 C O N C L U S I O N S AGIR progr
Page 76 and 77: 2 findings 4 Recommendations The ke
Page 78 and 79: 4 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S Ma
Page 80 and 81: 4 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S rea
Page 82 and 83: A N N E X 1 - A G I R P A R T N E R
Page 84 and 85: A N N E X 2 - T E R M S O F R E F E
Page 86 and 87: A N N E X 2 - T E R M S O F R E F E
Page 88 and 89: 2 findings Annex 3 - Inception Repo
Page 90 and 91: A N N E X 3 - I N C E P T I O N R E
Page 106 and 107: 2 findings Annex 4 - Documents Revi
Page 108 and 109: A N N E X 4 - D O C U M E N T S R E
Page 116 and 117: A N N E X 5 - P E O P L E I N T E R
Page 118: Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Program
show all

Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?