The document discusses how Action Against Hunger (ACF) improved their use of external evaluations. [1] Previously, evaluations had inconsistent impact and were seen as "audits" rather than opportunities. [2] ACF created an evaluation policy and guidelines framework to change perceptions and maximize contributions. [3] This included processes to identify and share best practices across missions to improve field programs.

1. The Needle in the Haystack
The role of external evaluations in identifying and
promoting good practices within NGOs
Saul Guerrero
Senior Evaluations, Learning & Accountability Advisor
Action Against Hunger (ACF)

2. A simple story that may be of interest…
First, because organisations may relate to the issues
Second, because our experiences may help others in
tackling these issues
Third, because this is the story of what happens when a
consultant/evaluator infiltrates an organisation

3. In 2010
No finalised/approved policy or guidelines for evaluations
The impact of individual evaluations on organisational
performance and practice was inconsistent
Evaluations were something that field teams largely saw as
someone else’s desire to “audit” a programme

4. But then an opportunity…
ACF International Evaluation Policy & Guideline
A framework that could help us change ideas about, and
contributions of, external evaluations

5. Diversity
Terms of
Reference
ACF Evaluation
Policy &
Guidelines
Best DAC
Practices Criteria
Predictability

6. DAC Criteria
Criteria Rating Rationale
(1 low, 5 high)
1 2 3 4 5
Impact
Sustainability
Coherence
Coverage
Relevance/Appropriateness
Effectiveness
Efficiency
But why the need to quantify?

7. For field programmes
Track changes from year to year (or evaluation to evaluation)
For Headquarters
Track changes from programme to programme
BUT everyone understood that the numbers meant only
so much. What matters is their comparative value, and
the rationale behind them.

8. Today we can use this to show that programmes that are
relevant/appropriate, for example, are those that are good
at recognising and adapting to changing needs
Link it to actual programmes
Promote it as an evidence-based value

9. Best Practices
Not just a “feel good” exercise
A way of using an often underutilised dimension of working
with external evaluators: their experience as an actual filter
to distil the “special stuff” from a programme
“The evaluation is expected to provide one (1) key example
of Best Practice from the project/programme. This example
should relate to the technical area of intervention, either in
terms of processes or systems, and should be potentially
applicable to other contexts where ACF operates”

10. What is this “Best Practice”?
What makes it good/different/stand out?
How can we do more of it?
Not just an external idea/process
Giving external evaluators a designated role in triggering a
much wider learning process

11. What is it?
How does it work? Best Practices from all 46 missions
How to move forward?
Expanded goes into Learning Review
Best Practice
resulting in
feeds into
Field
HQs Technical
Techies Technical/Policy
Publications Debate
shared with which influence
Best
Practice which provide
Field Practices
Identified by evaluations

12. It is not perfect, and there is much to do still…
But after two years, we are starting to see this process
come to life
So, what have we learned from it all?

13. Sort out the haystack first
Organisations can change perceptions about the
role/usefulness of evaluations – but you need to make it
your goal, and you need to work top-down and bottom-up
Enlist help in searching
You can cater for the learning interests of programmes, and
the learning needs of an organisation– but evaluations
need to strike a balance between diversity and
predictability of information
Do something with the needle!
External evaluations can be given a key role in triggering
wider organisational learning – but its must be seen as part
of a larger, more participatory process that involves
different people at different levels