Monthly Corner

Laura Hughston - Blog

Arnoux Mouafo Nopi & Dimitri Tsona Zapzi - Article 

Prof. Wangari Mwai and Prof. Catherine Ndungo - BOOK

  • Understanding Gender and Identity Through The Gender Dictionary

    Publisher: Bleeding Ink Scribes

RAI SENGUPTA - gender-transformative evaluation tools

This synthesis draws on evidence from 17 humanitarian evaluations across diverse crisis settings. It identifies key feminist evaluation innovations across four domains - design, methods, analysis, and ethics - illustrating how feminist principles can be embedded throughout the evaluation process. It also surfaces broader shifts required at policy, institutional, and practice levels to realise the transformative potential of feminist approaches in humanitarian contexts.

The toolkit translates these insights into applied guidance for evaluators and organisations. It provides step-by-step support across the full evaluation cycle, including planning, design, methods, analysis, ethics, and dissemination. Drawing on global feminist evaluation practice, humanitarian guidance, and gender evaluation standards, it includes adaptable tools, participatory and arts-based methods, guiding questions, and templates for field application.

Ritu Dewan & Swat Raju - Article

  • Economy and Inequality

    In Promises & Reality 2026 Citizen’s Review of Year 2 of the NDA-III Government. Coordinated by Wada Na Todo Abhiyan, June 20, 2026. pp 94-100.

UTTHAN - Research Report

Traversing the path with women farmers in their fields and in our reflections/writings, a stark observation was the sheer lack of localized and regional vocabulary and terminology to adequately capture and communicate the understanding of climate change and mitigation strategies, informed by the unique experiences and needs of small and marginal women farmers. This is what propelled our research - to examine how women farmers perceive, express, experience, and respond to climate variability across

Our Research Report centres the lived experiences, generational knowledge, and resilience strategies of small and marginal women farmers from the coastal (Bhavnagar) and hilly (Dahod & Panchmahal) regions i.e two contrasting agro-climatic zones of Gujarat. Through their voices, the study reveals exactly how climate change intersects with gender, land rights, labour burdens, and food security.

Events

Vacancies

INCLUDOVATE -  Call for Researchers, Pacific Focus

About the job

At Includovate, we are expanding our Pacific Research & Evaluation Talent Pool and inviting researchers, evaluators, consultants, and development practitioners to join a growing network of professionals committed to creating meaningful social impact.

As a feminist research incubator and certified social enterprise, Includovate works with partners including UNICEF, UNFPA, the ILO, governments, and development organisations across 23+ countries. Our work spans gender equality, social inclusion, health, disability, youth, climate, WASH, market systems, and other development priorities.

We are particularly keen to connect with experts from:
📍 Papua New Guinea
📍 Solomon Islands
📍 Vanuatu
📍 Timor-Leste
📍 Fiji
📍 Samoa
📍 Tonga
📍 Indonesia
📍 Australia
and across the wider Pacific region.

We welcome expertise in:
✓ Research, Monitoring, Evaluation & Learning
✓ Gender Equality & Social Inclusion
✓ Health & SRHR
✓ Disability Inclusion
✓ Youth Development
✓ Climate & Environment
✓ WASH
✓ Market Systems Development
✓ Governance & Community Development

Whether your expertise lies in data collection, research, evaluation, technical advisory, facilitation, or team leadership, we would love to hear from you.
By joining our Talent Pool, you become part of a trusted network of professionals who may be considered for future research, evaluation, advisory, and consulting opportunities across the Pacific region and beyond.

🔗 Register here: https://lnkd.in/eyF66S7H

Members

Impact Assessment without a baseline

Hi 

Am planning to do an impact assessment that will assess the impact of a teaching tool used by teachers Unfortunately a baseline wasn't done and its over three years now.  Was wondering if comparing to a control group of teachers who haven't used the tool would work. Are there any other methods that can be utilized to assess impact without bias.

Thanks

Priya Anand

Views: 3438

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cecilia Manyame on October 9, 2015 at 20:02

Thanks Prya for sharing thereby starting this very interesting discussion. I have learnt something from this. However, more importantly for me, I now understand, from this discussion, what was meant by colleagues, who are professional evaluators, when they argued that not every social scientist or professional who has evaluated development projects/programmes is an evaluator. This was said at the 2014 Africa Region Evaluation Association (AfREA) Conference.

From the responses you have received, it sounds like you would be better off using mixed methods, as well as the 'control' group of teachers that you suggested. The focus group discussions might bring in other factors that might validate findings from the other methods. As someone pointed out in this discussion, some desk research including any reports such as project/programme or field reports, might shed some light with regard to the methodology. Analysing the results against the original objectives and a SWOT(C)analysis might also help.

I hope that it is possible for you to share you experience after the impact assessment is done.

Cecilia

Permalink Reply by Godfrey Bwanika on October 12, 2015 at 18:01

Thanks for a very informative discussion but what about using the most significant change approach establish the effect of the teaching tool

Permalink Reply by Priya Anand on October 9, 2015 at 19:03

Thanks Esteban and Will for recommending Michael Bamberger's book. And to Isha, Sarah and Fanaye. Your suggestions are very valuable.

Permalink Reply by William N. Faulkner on October 9, 2015 at 21:31

Hello Priya,

Looks like you have enough to get started here, but I wanted to quickly add my voice as this is a topic of interest to me. Maybe just my lens, bit it seems I can still hear echoes of the great Randomista vs. Big Push Forwards debate (https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/so-what-do-i-take-away-from-the-great-e...). My favorite outcome of that whole era (now, thankfully, subsiding with a few nasty pockets of resistance) was the DFID paper which outlines the full range of potential impact evaluation methods (http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/Output/189575/), the counterfactual-based among them. P. 16-23 have a great birds-eye summary of the options out there. 

Regards,

William

Permalink Reply by Rituu B Nanda on October 12, 2015 at 8:40

Thanks to Deo- Gracias Houndolo from 3ie Delhi office for sending a response through email

Dear Rituu,

Thanks for posting this question. 
Technically speaking one can evaluate an intervention using a with - without approach. However findings from such a methodological approach would be biased and change that would be measured cannot be attributed to the intervention evaluated. Simply because without a baseline reference,  it is Simply not possible to effectively mesure the magnitude of effect induced by the teachers intervention. Please note that baseline data in the treatment group is not enough to limit biases but you also need baseline data in your comparison group. Hence baseline are necessary to measure effect that are attributable to your intervention. Otherwise,  just acknowledge that your results are about outcome evaluation. 
More need also to be covered with respect to identification strategy. 
In any case,  secondary data exploration could be a way to address the lack of baseline data in this case.

Best wishes, 
Deo.

0w9tsc8blaqyhPermalink Reply by 0w9tsc8blaqyh on October 12, 2015 at 10:48

I was wondering if  it helps to measure dose dependent response. Here  change after  exposure to time to the tools- 6 months, 12 months, 18 months or 2years etc in addition to the  methods suggested

3eojs5yj0d18mPermalink Reply by 3eojs5yj0d18m on October 12, 2015 at 11:20

Time-series/longitudinal analysis will require data collected over a period of time among the intervention group. there is no baseline for sure but am not sure if any data has been collected during the 3 years of intervention.

Permalink Reply by Elizabeth Negi on October 12, 2015 at 15:55

Dear Priya,

I think you have all the pros and cons to conduct the impact assessment. I don't think the use of a control group of teachers alone will reflect the changes anticipated through the use of the tool.

I do think Participatory methods especially FGDs as already suggested will be the best option. Teachers/schools usually have past records of these may be a source of qualitative and quantitative data if objectives were set clearly at the start of the project

Elizabeth Negi 

RSS

© 2026   Created by Rituu B Nanda.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service