Evaluation of the Southern and Eastern Africa Regional Centre for ...

2 Methodology and analytical framework17The Evaluation Team approached the assessment of impact and sustainability by useof what is termed theory of change (TOC) and programme theory. TOC refers to howthe objectives of a programme purportedly lead to specific outputs, outcomes andimpacts and especially in ‘making assumptions explicit’ in the steps taken to achievethese ends. In many cases programmes/projects lack an explicit TOC, although theprogramme/project may be based on several robust assumptions about how thingschange through programme or project activities. We will therefore bring to the foreunderlying assumptions in the Centre’s work, and discuss their internal validity. Onthe basis of the work by the Centre we will identify – schematically – how theintervention imagines the iterative sequence of actions that lead towards theobjectives.Our study will hopefully lead to robust conclusions about whether the work of theCentre (Master’s programme, graduates, regional collaboration) has worked in termsof improving women’s situation in the countries where the graduated students areworking, and not least explore to what extent this work could be improved. There isthe important issue of what the appropriate level to evaluate impact should be.Impact is primarily evaluated through the contribution to developing Women’s law,the Masters course and its immediate vehicle for influence beyond the course,namely, the graduates. This focus is particularly important in light of how the Centreperceives its role and its goals and objectives. In terms of the Programme theory theassumption made by the Centre is that by strengthening the discipline you establish acadre of highly skilled women to advance women’s legal and social status. In additionto personal and individual impact, the application of knowledge therefore inrespective institutional contexts becomes a key gauge of broader impact.There appears to be a conceptual gap because little is provided in terms ofprogramme approach. Upon closer reading, however, some limited evidence can behighlighted. Again, the 2002 ‘Forward Planning’ report mentions career advancementas one avenue for impact. Furthermore input from a person from the NGO sectorraised concerns about how research knowledge should be applied (citing the role ofdissertations in that case). It is these kinds of issues whereby we would hope fordeeper discussion of avenues for impact and in close relation, sustainability.For achieving the assessment of impact and sustainability we divide the work tasksinto 4 overlapping components which require a mixed methods approach, namely,qualitative and quantitative, as follows:1)Document analysis - key documents including funding application, reports, plans etc,were identified in the ToR, especially concerning evaluations and mid-term reviews