Monthly Corner

Astha Ramaiya [Co-author] Shared the Journal Article - Published in Child Abuse & Neglect, June 2026

A new systematic review published in Child Abuse & Neglect examined the link between mental health and technology-facilitated child sexual exploitation and abuse (TF-CSEA). Analysing 10 studies with over 25,000 participants across seven countries, researchers found that depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and prior trauma were consistently associated with victimisation. Crucially, the relationship appears bidirectional with mental health difficulties both preceding and resulting from exploitation; creating potential cycles of repeated harm. Perhaps most striking: traditional parental monitoring through technological surveillance showed limited protective effects. What actually mattered? The quality of parent-child relationships including, open communication, emotional warmth, and trust. The findings suggest prevention efforts should combine universal school-based programmes building emotional resilience with targeted support for high-risk youth, while parent education should prioritise connection over control. With 12.5% of children globally experiencing online solicitation annually, understanding these psychological pathways is essential for effective child protection.

Alok Srivastava, Vasanti Rao & Amita Puri Article on International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, January 2026

Tara Prasad Article on Challanges and Lessons Learns of GESI responsive and inclusive conservatiom practices, Nepal

Ritu Dewan & Swati Raju Article on Economic and Political Weekly

Viera Schioppetto shared Thesis on Gender Approach in Development Projects

Events

Vacancies

  • Seeking Senior Analyst - IPE Global

About the job

IPE Global Ltd. is a multi-disciplinary development sector consulting firm offering a range of integrated, innovative and high-quality services across several sectors and practices. We offer end-to-end consulting and project implementation services in the areas of Social and Economic Empowerment, Education and Skill Development, Public Health, Nutrition, WASH, Urban and Infrastructure Development, Private Sector Development, among others.

Over the last 26 years, IPE Global has successfully implemented over 1,200 projects in more than 100 countries. The group is headquartered in New Delhi, India with five international offices in United Kingdom, Kenya, Ethiopia, Philippines and Bangladesh. We partner with multilateral, bilateral, governments, corporates and not-for-profit entities in anchoring development agenda for sustained and equitable growth. We strive to create an enabling environment for path-breaking social and policy reforms that contribute to sustainable development.

Role Overview

IPE Global is seeking a motivated Senior Analyst – Low Carbon Pathways to strengthen and grow its Climate Change and Sustainability practice. The role will contribute to business development, program management, research, and technical delivery across climate mitigation, carbon markets, and energy transition. This position provides exceptional exposure to global climate policy, finance, and technology, working with a team of high-performing professionals and in collaboration with donors, foundations, research institutions, and public agencies.

More Details Please go through

Members

Evaluation terms of reference

Dear colleagues,

Following up on some individual exchanges I have had recently with colleagues regarding the quality of RFP & ToR for evaluation in “development”, some of my takes:
If it doesn’t value it is not an evaluation: The extent to which something has been achieved is a measurement question, not a valuing question. Checking to see whether intended results have been achieved, or not, unintended positive, negative, etc. does not make an evaluation. Evaluative reasoning is required to value.
Purpose: The specific value proposition of the specific evaluation to the specific claim/rights holders based on their value perspectives. To say the purpose of the evaluation is learning and accountability is meaningless (and applicable to thousands of evaluations)
Approach: The valuing frames that evaluative reasoning will consider. Participatory is not an approach. 
Methodology: How the evaluation proposes to fulfill its value proposition, considering context, time and resources.
The OECD-DAC “criteria”, as are all other off-the-shelf one-size-fits-all operationalized value perspectives, are the expression of a specific valuing frame that may not be appropriate to valuing the evaluand at hand, i.e. it is a production process framing. This is especially the case in “donor” financed RFP where they are routinely used without due consideration.
If an RFP&TOR specify the methodology it is a task based assignment, i.e. it is a matter of doing what you’re told and paid for. In those cases, which are a majority, the independence and autonomy of the evaluation is compromised from the start, as are the claims and rights of holders.
RFP should include the proposed budget in all cases. 
A good question to ask at the start, for both commissioners and interested parties: what is it that this proposed evaluation will do that a performance audit can’t do?
Cheers,
Ian

Ian C. Davies
Credentialed Evaluator/Évaluateur Qualifié
idavies@capacity.ca 
Mobile Europe: +33 (0) 6 89 40 88 38
Office: +1 (250) 920-0656 ext 232
Mobile Canada: +1(778) 967-1279
Skype: iancdavies

Views: 98

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Gender and Evaluation to add comments!

Join Gender and Evaluation

Comment by Rituu B Nanda on August 28, 2020 at 19:48

I am including here some terms you described in today's SLEVA webinar.  Thanks a lot Ian.

  • Monitoring is a management function: the responsibility and obligation to measure, assess and report on the performance of the intervention and/or entity.
  • Audit: a process superimposed on an accountability relationship to provide assurance (financial, performance, compliance with authorities).
  • Evaluation: a systematic & inclusive process of valuing based on the value perspectives of the claims / rights holders.
  • The term (and concept) of rigour is rooted in the natural sciences and refers to the ability to precisely replicate the research protocol, e.g. the experiment. Rigour in the social sciences is not a term of art. Rather it is used by different individuals or groups, in different ways, including for marketing and self-promotion. As such, it is a loaded term, the use of which in evaluation tends more to obfuscate than to bring clarity and promote understanding
  • mixed methods- the original intent of this term (which I got directly from its coiner Carole Weiss years ago) is mixed constructs, i.e. multiple perspectives on valuing constructs

© 2026   Created by Rituu B Nanda.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service