- Home
- About us
- ILAC Activities
- Resources
- ILAC Publications
- ILAC Briefs
- ILAC Sourcebook
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Chapter 6: Introduction Part 2
- Chapter 7: Innovation histories
- Chapter 9: Culture study as a tool for change
- Chapter 12: Collaborative agreements
- Chapter 13: Facilitation as a foundation skill for ILAC
- Chapter 14: Learning alliances
- Chapter 15: Institutional histories
- Chapter 16: Engaging Scientists through Institutional Histories
- Chapter 18: Horizontal evaluation
- Chapter 19: Appreciative inquiry
- Part 3 - Cases and experiences
- Part 4 - Challenges and strategies
- About the authors
- Glossary
- References
- Part 2 - Tools and approaches
- Presentations by ILAC Team
- Working Papers
- Journal Articles
- Newsletter
- Reports
- ILAC Library
- Tools and methods for M&E
- Appreciative inquiry
- Biophysical measurements
- Case study
- Content analysis
- Contribution analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Creative expression
- Diaries, journals and logs
- Dreams realised or visioning
- Expert review
- GIS mapping
- Graphing results
- Group assessment
- Historical trends and timelines
- Horizontal evaluation
- Impact evaluation
- Benefit-cost methods
- Case studies
- Cost-effectiveness analysis
- Counterfactual Impact Evaluation (CIE)
- Difference-in-difference
- Econometric methods
- Ex-post comparison of project beneficiaries with a control group
- Instrumental variables
- Integrated partial indicators
- Mathematical programming
- Modified peer review
- Partial indicators of impact
- Patent analysis
- Pipeline comparison
- Production function approach
- Propensity score matching
- Quasi-experimental design, involving the use of matched control and project groups
- Randomization
- Rapid assessment or review, conducted ex post
- Regression discontinuity design
- Simulation method
- User surveys
- Impact flow diagram
- Innovation histories
- Institutional history
- Institutional linkage diagram
- Interviews
- Learning alliances
- Learning-oriented evaluation
- M&E Frameworks
- M&E wheel (or "spider web")
- Mapping (sketch)
- Matrix scoring
- Most significant change
- Net-Map
- Non-random sampling
- Observation
- Outcome mapping
- Participatory Impact Pathways Analysis
- Participatory methods
- Performance indicators
- Photographs and video
- Problem and objectives trees
- Random sampling
- Ranking and pocket charts
- Rapid appraisal methods
- Relative scales or ladders
- Rich pictures (or mind maps)
- SWOT
- Seasonal calendars
- Semantic differentials
- Social mapping or well-being ranking
- Sociograms
- Stakeholder analysis
- Survey
- Systems (or inputs-outputs) diagram
- Theory-Based Evaluation
- Transects
- Evaluation studies and reports
- Evaluating capacity development
- Partnership
- Seminars
- Video Room
- Links to other sites
- E-learning courses
- ILAC Publications
- Contact
- Blog
Nature and Effectiveness of Partnerships Across Several Projects Coordinated by IPGRI
Sun, 08/31/2008 - 12:52 — Cristina Sette
Publication Type:
MiscellaneousSource:
Impact Assessment and Evaluation: Discussion Paper No. 3, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome (2002)Keywords:
Effectiveness; Evaluation; IPGRI; partnerships; projectsAbstract:
In June and July of 2002, a study was undertaken to provide information to an External Programme and Management Review panel on the modus operandi of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) and to IPGRI management to help with priority setting and decision-making. IPGRI's modus operandi is atypical within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system because IPGRI is a scientific research institute without its own laboratories or experimental fields. It mobilizes partners to achieve goals related to sustainable management and use of plant genetic resources with the aim of improving people's lives. IPGRI operates in partnership with a wide range of collaborators including public and private institutes, international and national organizations and individuals ranging from policy-makers to subsistence farmers. Through these partnerships, facilitated by IPGRI's multidisciplinary professional staff and decentralized structure, IPGRI is able to achieve goals that would be beyond the scope of a single institute working in isolation. This paper presents an analysis of the nature and effectiveness of three of the partnerships coordinated by IPGRI.
Digg
Facebook
Favorite
LinkedIn
TwitterSublibrary:
Evaluation
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page