- 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
SG2000 Innovations in Africa
Wed, 08/06/2008 - 12:08 — Cristina Sette
Dejene Aredo, Addis Ababa University (on the picture)
The objectives of this project are to learning on the Learning Capacity of Development Donors through and externally conducted Knowledge and Monitoring System of SG2000 innovations in Uganda and Ethiopia to assess impacts, inform SG2000 on its interventions in Africa, on successes, constraints, lessons learned, recommendations and to refocus their work and achieve highest impact based on their own declared goals.
Justification for participation in the Learning Laboratory:
The project under question is a unique case of an external evaluation, commissioned by a Donor to CIMMYT to evaluate the effects of their past and current efforts in funding development in Africa , because of a need to assess and document impacts as well as to learn from past and current efforts to improve targeting and effectiveness of their work. The effort brings together effectively a variety of key development players that, after some initial reluctance to participate for the fear of evaluation, are now convinced of the approach and need for the assessment and eager to learn from it for improving their own performance so to have real impact on their own declared goals. This is demonstrated by early change in policy by the implementing agency to refocus their work based on the findings of the assessment being conducted by CIMMYT.
The benefits expected from participating in the Learning Laboratory include training and skill building for the field teams and development agency, principally increased visibility for the work, among stakeholders and within the broader agricultural innovation community and particularly as outstanding providers of impact assessment and evaluation leadership, increased knowledge and skills from participation in the Learning Laboratory and evaluations and impact studies, expanded publication output, strengthened capacity to foster pro-poor innovation and to conduct useful evaluations and impact assessments, access to human and financial resources for capacity development, evaluation and impact assessment. The Learning Laboratory case would in fact be the collaborative project that uses the SG2000 – CIMMYT project as a learning case.
Case study members:
Dejene Aredo, Addis Ababa University (on the picture)Roberto La Rovere, CIMMYT's Impacts Targeting and Assessment Unit
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page