Plan International: Performance Measurement, Assessment, and Program Evaluation

Plan International: Performance Measurement, Assessment, and Program Evaluation

Description of Evaluation’s Purpose and Mandate

The purpose and mandate of Plan International’s Policy evaluation are clearly stated. From the onset, the overall purpose and scope of the evaluation are clear. There is a clear direction on why the assessment is necessary. It is to investigate the impact and outcomes of Plan International’s strategy on gender equality and inclusion and, consequently, find ways of improving it. The scope of the evaluation is clearly stated. It is from 2011 to 2016. Essentially, it extends from the development of the Gender Equality Policy up to the implementation of the strategy. For effective evaluation, the involvement of Plan International’s full scope is imperative. This calls upon involvement from International Headquarters, National, Regional, Liaison, and Country Offices.

The evaluation has two main broad objectives: accountability and learning. In reference to accountability, the evaluation assesses and gives feedback on the quality and outcomes of the Policy and Strategy of Gender Equality. In regards to learning, the evaluation seeks to bring out a clear understanding of the changes that took place or never occurred, with the intention of deriving better practices for both internal and external learning. Again, this objective is significant in providing findings that help in the decision-making process surrounding the improvement of the Policy and Strategy on Gender Equality. Subsequently, the findings will have to be circulated to different stakeholders, and Plan International will look for avenues to present the outcomes at both internal and external events.

The specific objectives of the evaluation are as follows:

Assessing the capacity of the policy to develop a clear vision aimed at promoting gender equality and the implementation of the policy as well as the integration of gender equality. Moreover, the evaluation seeks to ascertain the significance and authority of the Gender Equality Strategy in relation to external benchmarks. In other words, does the scope of the Policy and Strategy have a sound alignment to the current approaches and practices on gender equality and the rights of girls? Another specific objective of the evaluation is to evaluate the strategy’s findings and priority actions in reference to the resources and capacity of Plan International. In other words, do the findings, priority actions align themselves with the overall organizational needs?

Moreover, assessment of the progress made as well as identifying the strengths, weaknesses, and challenges in relation to the intentions of the policy and the objectives of the strategy. It is also clear that the evaluation seeks to know the extent to which Plan international has remained committed to gender equality since the policy was put in place. Furthermore, the need for a new combined policy and how it would benefit the organization is brought to the fore. Lastly, the evaluation sees the importance of providing recommendations for the organization’s integration o gender equality, girl’s rights, and inclusion..

Identification of the Project Design Logic

The project design logic is evident from the background information provided. To begin with, information on the inception of Plan International and why it exists comes out quite clearly. Putting an end to global poverty and improving the lives of children is the mandate of Plan International. It is also clear that gender equality is pivotal to the vision of Plan International in its desire to inspire boys and girls to achieve their fullest potential. From such, it’s possible to know what the organization stands for and what it is doing to make sure that it achieves its goals. Fundamentally, it is possible to identify that the goal of Plan International is to make sure that gender equality, the rights of girls, and inclusion are elements that are put on the forefront. Judging from global trends, gender equality and inclusion is something that has been attracting the input of major stakeholders, with a major emphasis being the desire to uplift the standards of the girl child. It is on this basis that Plan’s Policy on Gender Equality came to the fore in 2011. Afterward, Plan International’s Strategy on Gender Equality was also approved. Therefore, from the background information, it is possible to identify the project design logic. In other words, the criterion for success is clearly defined by the background information provided.

The Roles of the Evaluator

A critical and detailed assessment of the roles of the evaluator shows that there is substantive work being done to make the evaluation process a success. It is important to point out that the evaluation process involves several elements that the evaluator has to put much emphasis in. They include the collection, analysis, and interpretation of qualitative and quantitative data. The data is relevant to the objectives of the evaluation and the evaluation questions. The data collection comes from both secondary and primary sources. It is significant to point out that the evaluation process incorporates child protection, gender equality, and inclusion. Based on the above, the most important question is whether the roles and duties of the evaluator are disseminated satisfactorily.

After a careful review of the role of the evaluator, it’s evident that satisfaction is derived from the input put in place. To begin with, the evaluator succeeds in creating an external context on the subject of the evaluation process by scanning gender mainstreaming among NGOs. Again, the evaluator reviews different theoretical approaches related to mainstreaming gender equality in different organizations. Still, on the same, there is a detailed assessment of applicable Plan International’s internal documentation like the Gender Equality Self-Assessment reports. Another major role of the evaluator that is conducted well is a progress review. Basically, this involves interviewing particular representatives of Plan International. The representatives are from the organization’s headquarters, regional, national, and country offices. Representatives from partner organizations are also interviewed. Additionally, on progress review, the evaluator succeeds in conducting a short survey of the efforts and progress made by Plan International at the institutional level during the financial year 2017.

Another pivotal role of the evaluator in the evaluation process is the doing of case studies. The total number of case studies is 10. The breakdown of the case studies is as follows: 2 country offices in every region and two national offices. The evaluator’s role in conducting the case studies is to make sure that the perspectives of different staff members are collected. The aim of collecting the views of the members of staff is to know what the extent has the global Policy and Strategy on Gender Equality being implemented in daily programming work. The National Office case studies aim at ascertaining the extent to which the Policy and Strategy have been implemented towards advocacy and communications work. Lastly, the evaluator’s role in data analysis and reports is clearly evident. Based on the above, it is worth noting that the roles/duties of the evaluator are disseminated satisfactorily.

The Relevance of the ToR’s Suggested Evaluation Framework with Project Framework

From a critical perspective, there are several imperative points that show the relevance of the suggested evaluation framework with the project framework. From the onset, it is clear that the suggested evaluation framework seeks to provide a clear-cut vision on gender equality based on the Policy’s ability. What this means is that gender equality is a major agenda in the evaluation process. This is quite relevant to the project framework because it also seeks to promote gender equality and inclusion. The evaluation and project frameworks both have a similar vision of creating integrating gender equality within the core five areas of Plan International. Secondly, the evaluation framework seeks to evaluate the relevance of the Gender Equality Strategy in relation to external benchmarks and best practices. In other words, the framework seeks to understand and evaluate how the strategy fits into the larger scope of the external perspectives on gender equality and the rights of girls.

Indeed, this is relevant to the larger framework of the project. Plan International does not work alone in ensuring that the lives of children are taken care of. It works in collaboration with other stakeholders to ensure that gender equality and inclusion are streamlined into the fabric of the society to give children a chance to have a better life. Moreover, the evaluation framework fits into the larger picture of the overall project’s framework through the assessment of progress made in the implementation of the Policy and the realization of the strategy’s objectives. The identification of fundamental strengths and weaknesses as well as barriers and challenges are pivotal elements of the evaluation process. This is the same case with the project framework. The larger vision of the project by Plan International is to make sure that progress is made in regards to the realization of goals and objectives at different levels. This is made possible through the effective implementation of the strategy in different levels and functions of Plan International. Of great importance still, both the evaluation and project frameworks show the importance of commitment towards the awareness and growth of gender equality. From this, it’s evidently clear that the roles and performance indicators of the Executive Team have a great contribution to play in ensuring that an organizational commitment is put in place for gender equality awareness.

Lastly, the evaluation framework seeks to provide recommendations for the future of Plan International. The recommendations come in handy in integrating gender equality, the rights of girls and inclusion. This is the same case with the project’s framework as it invites fresh ideas and contributions from major stakeholders with the aim of creating a great and brighter future for children, especially girls who have had their rights being violated against in different parts across the globe. From the above analysis, it is notable to point out that there is relevance between the evaluation framework and the project framework.

Evaluation Model for Consideration Based on the ToR

Based on the ToR, the evaluation model that is the most ideal is the Behavioral Objectives Approach. This evaluation model focuses primarily on the extent to which the objectives of a project or process are achieved. Thus, the basic question that guides this type of evaluation is, “Is the project or process realizing its set objective?” Based on the ToR, it is evidently clear that objectives are at the core of Plan International’s Policy and strategy as well as the evaluation. Here, the question is, what are the objectives set, and are they being achieved? First and foremost, the terms of reference involve the evaluation of Plan International’s strategy on gender equality. So, the evaluation’s wider scope is based on the capacity of the organization’s ability to achieve its objectives.

Generally, Plan International’s broad objectives are to become a global leader on fighting for the rights of girls, promote gender equality, and advocate for inclusion, and to integrate the above-mentioned into everything that the organization does. Once the broad objectives are broken down into specific ones, they expand to encompass deeper aspects related to the organization’s strategy and policy. It is through this that it becomes absolutely clear that the ideal evaluation model to consider is the behavioral approach. The achievement of objectives are so paramount because it is though such that the foundation for what to come is set. For instance, the recommendations that Plan International receives so as to improve its gender equality strategy stems from the attainment of the objectives set. In other words, in order for Plan to see progress in its policy and strategy, there has to be growth in its project and the processes involved. Take for example, one of the objectives of the evaluation process, which is to assess the progress that has been made in regards to the intentions of the Policy and objectives of the Strategy. Here, the progress made implies that there has been an implementation of the Policy and strategy of Plan International as far as gender equality is concerned. Therefore, it is through the evaluation of the objective that the Plan is able to know whether it has moved forward or it is stagnant in relation to the rights of girls, inclusion, and gender equality are concerned. Thus, the evaluation model that is best fit for this evaluation process is the behavioral objectives approach.

The Evaluator Team’s Competencies

The question of whether the ToR required of the evaluator team’s competencies is convincing is significant. The competencies of the evaluator in the evaluation process are highly valuable. They play a big role in determining how far the evaluation will go. There is so much to be done, especially in the data collection, analysis, and interpretation processes. Therefore, it is critical for the evaluator and the team working on the evaluation process to be highly competent and knowledgeable so as to have have positive outcomes. The competencies required of the evaluator include:

• Having a graduate degree or experience in research or a substantial background in international development studies, human rights, gender studies, or any applicable discipline.
• Having at least 10 years of experience in evaluations with different stakeholders
• Possessing data collection, research, and writing proficiency
• Quality communication and presentation skills
• Competency in gender equality and having experience in working in an NGO context
• Ability to speak fluent English and possess skills in French and Spanish

The above-mentioned competencies are convincing for the evaluator to do a good job. To begin with, having a graduate degree and having done any or some of the aforementioned disciplines is an added advantage. Since the organization, the strategy, and Policy of evaluation are based on the disciplines, then it is convincing for an evaluator to possess such. The disciplines are highly related and they give the much-needed mileage in helping an evaluator succeed in the evaluation process. Also, having 10 years experience in doing evaluations with multiple stakeholders gives an evaluator a higher level of understanding that is vital in the evaluation process. Data collection and research skills equip an evaluator with all it takes to conduct an objective and reliable evaluation process for quality outcomes. Furthermore, possessing competency in gender equality is a convincing attribute since it is the subject of the evaluation process. Lastly, the ability to speak fluently goes a long way in elevating the capacity of an evaluator in conducting a successful evaluation process. Hence, the ToR required for the evaluator’s competencies is convincing enough to conduct an effective and successful evaluation.

The Management Approach of this Evaluation Practice Based on the ToR

Based on the ToR, the management approach of this evaluation practice is the behavioral approach. There are several ways through which the ToR tells that the behavioral approach is that management approach for this evaluation practice. Firstly, the evaluation is participative; it involves different stakeholders in giving valuable data. The interviews and case studies involved in the evaluation bring together relevant stakeholders able to give valuable information to the evaluator. It is because of this participative element that the behavioral approach emerges as the management approach that best fits the evaluation process. Another vital aspect that emerges from the terms of reference is that of management as leading. A critical assessment of the evaluation process shows that its objective is to ascertain the level of progress and growth in the implementation of Plan International’s strategy and Policy. It is through this that recommendations are given to further improve the organization’s plans. This is made possible through leading. The process of identifying possible recommendations to Plan International’s strategy can only be made possible through a leading process. This will involve collecting data from relevant persons with the intention of getting reliable and quality feedback. Here, the evaluator is the facilitator of the leading process. Therefore, it is evident through the discussed ways that the behavioral approach is the management approach for this evaluation practice.

Is the timeline reasonable?

In respect to time, 2 months is a fairly good amount of time to do the evaluation. The evaluation process will be divided into five portions, including: the inception phase, desk review, progress review, case studies, and reporting. Depending on the magnitude of the work involved, it is possible for the evaluator to undertake the process and complete it in time. However, this will require the process to be intensive, considering that Plan International’s Strategy and Plan are quite involving. The subject of the evaluation is not of a local nature, thus requiring a lot of time for the components of the evaluation to be completed in time. For instance, the interview will have to interview persons from the organization’s headquarters, Regional offices, National Offices, and Country offices. With this, a period of two months, though it might be enough, it will require intensive and massive collaboration for the work to be of high quality. Therefore, judging from the intensity of the evaluation process, the timeline is reasonable, only that it will deem it necessary for the evaluator to invest more time within the 2 months so as to handle all the components.

Strengths and Inadequacies of the Evaluation ToR

There are various strengths of the evaluation ToR that are worthy of a mention. To begin with, the approach and methodology of the evaluation is strong and valid. Thus, the data collected and analyzed has reliability, meaning that its impact on the future of Plan International is great. Also, the broad and specific objectives of the evaluation are detailed and relevant. This makes it possible for the evaluator to come up with applicable conclusions. Of great importance still, the evaluation’s framework and the project’s framework are relevant to each other, which is contributing greatly in improving the validity of the evaluation process. However, the only weakness with the evaluation ToR is that the timeframe for the inception and completion of the evaluation is relatively short. Though it might be enough, it has the likelihood of creating unnecessary pressure on the evaluator.