Author(s): Madhavi Sanjay Kulkarni
Evaluability assessment (EA) systematically ascertains readiness of government intervention for robust evidence-based evaluation and impact assessment. A government intervention includes a project, a programme, or a policy. This paper presents a thematic analysis, based on desk-review of selected guidelines and reports of Evaluability Assessments, for ascertaining their key methodological approaches, tools, and outcomes. Ten full-text Evaluability Assessment guidelines and ten EA reports (2011-2024) of major international evaluation agencies, like World Bank, UNDP, USAID and ILO who have standardised evaluation framework and tools are reviewed in this analysis. This review finds that eight out of ten evaluating agencies have framed their guidelines based on OECD-DAC standards. They establish Evaluability Assessment as a preliminary cost-saving step in reliable evaluation of any government intervention. There is consensus among evaluating agencies about the necessity of EAs in preventing wastage of resources due to untimely or faulty evaluations. Nonetheless, the variations occur in the emphasis and key focus areas of EAs due to specific mandates of evaluation agencies, such World Bank and USAID focus on accountability; UNDP and ILO have focus on learning and development effectiveness. Theory of Change is mentioned to be the most essential element of evaluability assessment in all the documents reviewed, except for one guidance document and three reports. Checklists are recommended by all guidance documents; however, are least used in evaluability assessment reports. Terms of Reference are used and recommended in half of the reports and guidance documents. Majority of the guidance documents and synthesis reviews have preferred checklists with rating scales and comments; also, a few of them have recommended use of questionnaires with or without scales; however, eight out of ten reports have not used the checklists. All guidance documents and synthesis reviews expect Evaluability Assessment to recommend Programme Design or Redesign and / or E&M Framework Design along with Designing or Redesigning of Theory of Change. As far as Evaluability Assessment reports are concerned, more than half of them recommend Theory of Change designed or redesigned; Two have recommended Programme Design and E&M Framework for impact evaluation. One has recommended formative qualitative evaluation; and, two have either recommended partial evaluation or postponement of evaluation by six months. This review will help global policy makers in undertaking the Evaluability Assessments of their nation-wide projects for improving the efficacy of impact assessments of such projects by adopting appropriate approach and methods. However, while selecting benchmark guidelines and methodology, they will have consider the context, objectives and utility of the impact evaluation of their project while selecting the benchmark guideline and methodology. The Evaluability Assessments with strategy so such adapted will enhance stakeholder engagement and will institutionalise the impact evaluation.