Page Comparison

...

...

Lead the WASH sector response evaluation process

Multisectoral evaluation evaluations do not focus on a specific sector, except in specific cases (evaluation of cholera outbreak might have a greater focus more on WASH and Health; evaluation of drought response might focus focuses on FSL etc.). In some contextcontexts, the WASH coordination platform and UNICEF might may find relevant to organize a specific evaluation of the WASH sector response. This has to be differentiated from usual WASH program project evaluation, as it is about evaluating the WASH response as a whole, often including an evaluation of the WASH coordination system as well. Depending on In the objective and the scope of the evaluation several methodologies can be considered:

Country wide field evaluation

This is a complete evaluation of the whole WASH response at crisis/country level. It involves interviews and site visit of a representative sample of beneficiaries and WASH infrastructure for the whole WASH response. Unless the crisis and the response is very localized, this type of sector specific country wide evaluation is rare and challenging. It would involve considerable resources. 

Key informants interview & documentary review. 

This is the most common sector level type of evaluation. It consist in reviewing main partner's projects and evaluation, perform key informant interview key guidance and tools on top of this page can be found a general methodology to carry out evaluation of humanitarian action (2016 ALNAP Evaluation Humanitarian Action Guide). It is important to involve the GWC when organizing a WASH response evaluation, as it can lead to the production of GWC lesson learned or technical guidance documents (see Technical guidance chapter). Depending on the objective and the scope of the evaluation, several specific methodologies can be considered:

Evaluate response through key informants interview & documentary review

This is a common type of sector level evaluation. It consists in reviewing cluster's and main partners' projects documents, perform key informant interviews at capital and field level, review data from other cluster clusters related to WASH such as health Health and nutritionNutrition, review recent coordination monitoring process results and finally draw conclusion upon on the efficiency, quality and relevancy of the WASH response following certain agreed criteria. The DAC/OECD evaluation criteria, generally used by partners for their project evaluation, can be use as well at the level for the sectoralso be used for sector evaluation: Relevance, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Impact, Sustainability (which the later can be replaced in emergency by localization Localization and connection with development/emergency sector). This evaluation exercise can requires significant resources and time, as there are usually hundreds of different project implemented by partners, and tens of partners to interview. Systematic review of partner’s evaluation Humanitarian/Development Nexus).  

Lead a systematic review of WASH partner’s projects evaluation (meta-evaluation)

WASH partners often implement internal or external evaluation of their projects. A systematic review will gather all partners' evaluation , compare their result and extrapolate the their results to the whole response. This exercise will be possible is feasible if:

• Significant A significant number of partners have evaluated formally their projects
• Partners have used comparable evaluation criteria
• Evaluation are geographically complementary
• Program evaluated follows Evaluated projects followed HRP/SOF strategy

Consequently, it is critical for the WASH coordination platform to anticipate and harmonize partner’s evaluation process, providing them with some parameters to be respected agree with the SAG on an harmonized evaluation protocol, setting up some minimum criteria partners should respect when carrying their evaluation (same evaluation criteria, evaluation coordinated between partner’s etc…)

Evaluation of WASH coordination

This is usually done at the same time as the response evaluationsimilar evaluation criteria; robust methodology etc.).

Lead a response-wide field evaluation

This is a complete evaluation of the whole WASH sector response, involving interviews and site visit of a representative sample of beneficiaries and WASH infrastructures in the whole country or region where the response took place. Unless the crisis and the response is very localized, this type of sector specific country wide evaluation is rare and challenging, involving considerable resources. 

Evaluate WASH coordination system

This is usually included in WASH response evaluation exercise, considering WASH coordination as one of the response inputs. The objective is to evaluate whether coordination has been efficient, and which impact effect it had on the response. The coordination performance monitoring questionnaire can be used (see after in this session) Cluster Coordination Performance Monitoring guidance can be used, as well as other indicators such as "time for recruitment/deployment of coordination staff", value for money analysis, achievement of GWC minimum requirement for coordination, coordination platform outputs…Impact and achievement of coordination core functions.

Coordinate WASH response impact measurement and research

 Although Although not a priority in emergency, evaluate the impact of the WASH response can be critical to orientate and improve future response, obtain evidence to responses. Obtain evidences of strong impact will also improve fundraising.    Emergency Emergency WASH response's overall objective is usually to decrease morbidity & mortality rate, and in some lesser extend, protect people’s livelihood, improve protection and improve child education. Measure the impact of WASH on these outcome domains outcomes is possible but complex, as many other confounding factors will influence them , and accurate data are (seasonality of disease, level of education, healthcare environment, food security...). Accurate data are also difficult to obtain in emergency context. It involves the set Impact measurement should involve setting up of complex research protocols, and in partnership with universities and research institutes. Impact measurement It often involves the use of control groups (group of people similar to the one studied but who did not benefit from the intervention), which has some ethical implication, especially in emergency.