Ited Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services. Evaluation and lessons learned - Evaluation policy. Evaluation policy What makes up UNICEF evaluation system?
Who is responsible for what? What standards and benchmarks do we use to ensure useful quality evaluation? These are the questions that UNICEF evaluation policy sets out to clarify. Evaluation Policy UNICEF evaluation policy was prepared as a response to the Executive Board decision 2006/9, in which the Board requested UNICEF to prepare a comprehensive evaluation policy for consideration by the Board. The UNICEF Evaluation Policy approved in 2008 is available in the following languages by clicking on the links below: [English] [French] [Spanish] [Chinese] [Arabic] [Russian] Executive Board Decision. Inst_ie_framework_me. DEReC. Department of State Program Evaluation Policy. A.
IntroductionB. PurposeC. ApplicabilityD. Evaluation RequirementE. Types of EvaluationsF. The Department of State is the lead institution for the conduct of American diplomacy and all foreign affairs efforts are paid for by the foreign affairs budget. A robust, coordinated and targeted evaluation function is essential to the ability of the Department to measure and monitor program performance; make decisions for programmatic adjustments and changes; document program impact; identify best practices and lessons learned; help assess return on investment; provide inputs for policy, planning and budget decisions; and assure accountability to the American people.
With the passage of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 and the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA) of 2010, Congress strengthened the mandate to evaluate programs and required agencies to include a discussion of program evaluations in their strategic plans and performance reports. Key Definitions. IFID Evaluation Manual. GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy 2010. DFID - Building the evidence to reduce poverty. South African Government. Dept of Justice. Citizenship & Immigration. Table of Contents 1.
Policy Objective 1.1 The objective of this policy is to ensure that Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) has an effective and independent evaluation function. 2. Policy statement 2.1 CIC will maintain an effective evaluation function that plays a strategic role in providing the Department with objective, timely and evidence-based findings, conclusions, and recommendations on the relevance and performance of programs, policies and initiatives, including conducting evaluations of the main grants and contributions programs. 3. 3.1 This CIC Policy is carried out under the authority of the Treasury Board Secretariat Policy on Evaluation (2009), which seeks to: 4. 4.1 Evaluation supports:
USAID Policy FAQ. USAID EvaluationPolicy. Treasury Board Policy FAQ. The Treasury Board has introduced the new Policy on Evaluation This Policy on Evaluation and its standard and directive has been renewed as part of Policy Suite Renewal, an important component of the Federal Accountability Action Plan and the government’s Management Agenda.
The renewal of the government’s management policies clarifies the management responsibilities and accountabilities of Ministers and Deputy Heads. By strengthening and streamlining how government works, the renewed policies make government more effective and accountable. Why is this policy important? The new policy directly supports the Expenditure Management System (EMS) of the Government of Canada by ensuring comprehensive and systematic information on program relevance and performance is available to support decision making. Treasury Board of Canada. 1.
Effective Date 1.1 The policy takes effect on April 1, 2009. Departments have until March 31, 2013 to fully implement section 6.1.8 (a) of the policy. 1.2 This version of the policy incorporates updates effective April 1, 2012. 1.3 Transitional considerations: 1.3.1 Pending the full implementation of section 6.1.8 (a), which can be no later than March 31, 2013, deputy heads will ensure that: approved departmental evaluation plans demonstrate progress towards achieving coverage of all departmental direct program spending (excluding ongoing programs of grants and contributions) over five years; and departmental evaluation plans that they approve for submission to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat as per section 6.1.7 of this policy, and that do not demonstrate evaluation coverage of all direct program spending over the ensuing five-year period, use a risk-based approach to planning coverage of direct program spending (excluding ongoing programs of grants and contributions.)
WHO.