Six OECD DAC Evaluation Criteria Adopted

News Date: 

Thursday, December 12, 2019

On December 10 2019, the OECD DAC (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's Development Assistance Committee) adopted the 'Evaluation Criteria: Adapted Definitions and Principles for Use' which contains six criteria.

  1. RELEVANCE: IS THE INTERVENTION DOING THE RIGHT THINGS? The extent to which the intervention objectives and design respond to beneficiaries’* , global, country, and partner/institution needs, policies, and priorities, and continue to do so if circumstances change. Note: “Respond to” means that the objectives and design of the intervention are sensitive to the economic, environmental, equity, social, political economy, and capacity conditions in which it takes place. “Partner/institution” includes government (national, regional, local), civil society organisations, private entities and international bodies involved in funding, implementing and/or overseeing the intervention. Relevance assessment involves looking at differences and trade-offs between different priorities or needs. It requires analysing any changes in the context to assess the extent to which the intervention can be (or has been) adapted to remain relevant. *Beneficiaries is defined as, “the individuals, groups, or organisations, whether targeted or not, that benefit directly or indirectly, from the development intervention." Other terms, such as rights holders or affected people, may also be used.
  2. COHERENCE: HOW WELL DOES THE INTERVENTION FIT? The compatibility of the intervention with other interventions in a country, sector or institution. Note: The extent to which other interventions (particularly policies) support or undermine the intervention, and vice versa. Includes internal coherence and external coherence: Internal coherence addresses the synergies and interlinkages between the intervention and other interventions carried out by the same institution/government, as well as the consistency of the intervention with the relevant international norms and standards to which that institution/government adheres. External coherence considers the consistency of the intervention with other actors’ interventions in the same context. This includes complementarity, harmonisation and co-ordination with others, and the extent to which the intervention is adding value while avoiding duplication of effort.
  3. EFFECTIVENESS: IS THE INTERVENTION ACHIEVING ITS OBJECTIVES? The extent to which the intervention achieved, or is expected to achieve, its objectives, and its results, including any differential results across groups. Note: Analysis of effectiveness involves taking account of the relative importance of the objectives or results.
  4. EFFICIENCY: HOW WELL ARE RESOURCES BEING USED? The extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an economic and timely way. Note: “Economic” is the conversion of inputs (funds, expertise, natural resources, time, etc.) into outputs, outcomes and impacts, in the most cost-effective way possible, as compared to feasible alternatives in the context. “Timely” delivery is within the intended timeframe, or a timeframe reasonably adjusted to the demands of the evolving context. This may include assessing operational efficiency (how well the intervention was managed).
  5. IMPACT: WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THE INTERVENTION MAKE? The extent to which the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended or unintended, higher-level effects. Note: Impact addresses the ultimate significance and potentially transformative effects of the intervention. It seeks to identify social, environmental and economic effects of the intervention that are longer term or broader in scope than those already captured under the effectiveness criterion. Beyond the immediate results, this criterion seeks to capture the indirect, secondary and potential consequences of the intervention. It does so by examining the holistic and enduring changes in systems or norms, and potential effects on people’s well-being, human rights, gender equality, and the environment.
  6. SUSTAINABILITY: WILL THE BENEFITS LAST? The extent to which the net benefits of the intervention continue, or are likely to continue. Note: Includes an examination of the financial, economic, social, environmental, and institutional capacities of the systems needed to sustain net benefits over time. Involves analyses of resilience, risks and potential trade-offs. Depending on the timing of the evaluation, this may involve analysing the actual flow of net benefits or estimating the likelihood of net benefits continuing over the medium and long-term.

Visit the OECD DAC website for more information.

Recent News & Events

GEF IEO Is looking to hire two Evaluation Analysts

Job Opportunity

The GEF Independet Evaluation Office is seeking to hire two extended term consultants to work as evaluation analyst. Interested professionals are hereby invited to submit a CV and a cover...

Evaluation at the Nexus of Environment and Development: IPDET Workshop

The International Program for Development Evaluation Training (IPDET) is a globally recognized and respected player in advanced training in the field of evaluation. Its courses and workshops are...

Webinar on the role of evaluation for climate action

Building on the outcomes of the recent UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26), this event aims to facilitate a dialogue on the role that evaluation can play for learning and bringing solutions towards the goals of the Paris Agreement...