Evaluations are an important tool in research as well as project and programme management. They provide information about what works, what does not, and why. Evaluation supports learning, improves the effectiveness of projects, and helps hold donors and governments accountable for results. Historically, evaluations of marginalised communities have neglected to incorporate their inputs. As Nind (2014) puts it, research has been conducted ‘on’ these communities, instead of with, by, or even for them. The concept of ‘Inclusive evaluation’ challenges this status quo.. By involving marginalised groups and vulnerable communities directly in our research, we can better understand and meet their needs. Their inputs and perspectives can also then be fed into the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of programmes and policies, Inclusive evaluation, in short, amplifies the voices of the marginalised, provides for more comprehensive and representative findings, and better aligned recommendations.
For example, gender mainstreaming overlooks the differences between different groups of women, and the unique needs (for example) of displaced women, widowed women, women with disabilities, minority and Indigenous women.
Marginalised groups can be harder and more costly to reach and evaluate. Often, target groups are located in remote areas that are unsafe and difficult to reach, compromising the inclusivity of data collection. When budgets are tight, data collection processes may favour reaching more easily accessible groups.
While some progress has been made in decolonising research and challenging Eurocentric research methodologies, there has been less progress in the evaluation sector, since those who receive funding for development and human rights interventions tend to be accountable to Northern donors. Additionally, evaluations often use generic frameworks that are not context-specific. There remains a need for expanded literature on inclusive evaluation methodology.
Research methodologies and evaluations are disproportionately shaped by the Global Research methodologies and evaluations are disproportionately shaped by the Global North since the region dominates the development space with its disproportionate financial resources and power. Evaluators, like consultants and other ‘experts’, are often sourced by donors, and there is an assumption that practitioners from the Global South are ‘recipients’ rather than ‘implementers of programmes’. Many professionals in the evaluation sector are far removed from the contexts and cultures they are evaluating, and often do not – or cannot – recognise structural barriers and issues of power. These dynamics leave project ‘beneficiaries’ and rural networks on the periphery of the evaluation process.
Evaluation results are often shared only with funders and programmers, and are not cascaded into the communities being evaluated. This is a missed opportunity since it limits the ability of target communities to fully comprehend internal trends and take appropriate action. These power dynamics need to change to ensure that evaluation is fully comprehensive, inclusive and participatory.
As a global thought leader on inclusive processes, we seek to decolonise evaluation and promote evidence-based, participatory approaches. We’re determined to contribute to the emerging field of ‘inclusive evaluation’ with groundbreaking and inclusive methods that change how development partners view evaluation. We continuously review evaluation processes, and provide opportunities for debate and discussion around this important issue, including on our blog. We have built a knowledge base demonstrating how to conduct inclusive evaluations in different contexts using different methods, and also developed new evaluation tools. Inclusion, in short, is – as ever – at the forefront of our work.
Includovate used an inclusive evaluation approach to assess UNICEF Thailand’s 2017-21 Country Programme, provide advice on strategic positioning and partnerships, and help inform the preparation of its 2022-6 Country Programme.
Client: UNICEF Thailand.
Includovate used an independent, summative and formative evaluation approach to track performance of the REAP II programme, identify lessons from implementation, and make recommendations for future improvements and best practices.
Client: UNICEF East Asia & Pacific.
Includovate conducted a qualitative study to evaluate the impact of CBBP through a gendered lens, looking at the constraints and barriers to participation, and providing recommendations for the next phase of the programme.
Client: International Livestock Research Institute CRP.
Includovate evaluated project progress; identified the ongoing challenges faced by children in the Maldives; recommended solutions; assessed how the programmes can be scaled up; and how partnerships can be enhanced to leverage more funding for child-sensitive social protection.
Client: UNICEF Ethiopia.
Input your search keywords and press Enter.