Skip to Main Navigation

Influential evaluations : evaluations that improved performance and impacts of development programs : Evaluaciones influyentes: evaluaciones que mejoraron el desempeñde los programas de desarrollo (Espanhol)

This report presents 8 examples of evaluations that had a significant impact. In many cases it was possible to compare the costs of conducting the evaluation with the economic benefits produced and to show that the evaluation was a highly cost-effective management tool. The cases describe the following evaluations: Improving the efficiency of the Indian employment assurance scheme; Using citizen report cards to hold the state to account in Bangalore, India; Assessing the effectiveness of water and sanitation interventions in Flores, Indonesia; Broadening the policy framework for assessing the viability of large dams; The abolition of wheat-flour ration shops in Pakistan; Improving the delivery of primary education services in Uganda; Enhancing the performance of a major environmental project in Bulgaria; Helping re-assess China's national forest policy.

Detalhes

  • Data do documento

    2004/09/22

  • TIpo de documento

    Documento de Trabalho

  • No. do relatório

    32879

  • Nº do volume

    1

  • Total Volume(s)

    1

  • País

    Mundo,

  • Região

    Regiões Mundiais,

  • Data de divulgação

    2005/07/16

  • Disclosure Status

    Disclosed

  • Nome do documento

    Evaluaciones influyentes: evaluaciones que mejoraron el desempeñde los programas de desarrollo

  • Palavras-chave

    agricultural land use change;public expenditure tracking survey;monitoring and evaluation system;sustainability of water supply;quality of delivery;water supply and sanitation;impact of development;social and environmental;public service agency;public service provider;gender and poverty;monthly intergovernmental transfers;environmental action plan;emergency relief effort;country case study;qualitative data collection;participatory research tool;loss of income;inflows of funds;public opinion poll;education and health;public service delivery;multilateral development bank;lean agricultural season;number of beneficiaries;environment and development;misallocation of fund;government primary school;maintenance of assets;rural poor household;forest sector policy;water and sewerage;primary education sector;forest land use;development research group;loss of job;sustainable forest management;access to decision-makers;method of estimation;irrigation water supply;national planning agency;poverty and gender;sanitation and hygiene;ration shop;large dam;Public Services;evaluation cost;forest policies;compensatory measure;wheat flour;Social Conflict;forest program;low-income consumer;mass media;commodity price;annual saving;household survey;political context;Knowledge Program;flood control;Public Spending;empirical work;rural employment;slum dweller;field work;dam safety;involuntary resettlement;random sample;stakeholder analysis;separate meeting;management capability;municipal agencies;national conservation;tidal wave;long-term changes;civil society;public reporting;citizen groups;public awareness;systematic feedback;administrative cost;evaluation question;program expenditure;increased equity;program effectiveness;budget constraint;political constraint;local expert;Forest Conservation;program outcome;analytical tool;government reports;monetary cost;independent agency;observed change;cost-effectiveness analysis;strengthening countries;resident missions;strategic approach;Land Ownership;evaluation activity;Funding agencies;indigenous people;project risk;shelter belts;tree cover;tree species;survey data;toxic gas;additional water;farming household;broad agreement;research community;organizational context;River basin;afforestation effort;sensitive data;weak enforcement;safety procedure;financial incentive;environmental regulation;environment department;additional revenue;mid-term evaluation;forest outcomes;forest official;provincial authority;safety regulation;sanitation interventions;cost-benefit analysis;potential borrower;alternative measure;shop owner;informal communication;policy space;international stakeholders;political support;government worker;Indigenous Peoples;research program;international agency;resettlement plan;Environmental Assessment;safety issue;existing dam;risk aversion;dam rehabilitation;convenient water;health facility;Power Generation;poverty alleviation;safeguard policy;Safeguard Policies;acceptable standard;social safeguard;compensation scheme;financial sustainability;flat rate;participant observation;international consultant;sustainable services;potentials for community;cost of option;national policy;community level;policy statement;government expenditure;program efficiency;equity impact;sanitation facility;food grain;management tool;evaluation capacity;dam management;unsatisfactory performance;secondary sources;stratified sample;qualitative information;Borrowing Countries;ordinary citizens;local culture;quantitative analysis;marginalized group;participatory assessment;water scheme;improved water;communal water;house connection;active participation;local researcher;widespread corruption;government subsidy;research institutions;government action;local agency;local monitoring;administrative delays;utilization rate;program impact;public bank;public stock;communal facility;Wage Bill;Social Protection;separate sample;public hospital;public meeting;smoking restrictions;agricultural area;Environmental Technology;larger school

Downloads

COMPLETAR RELATÓRIO

Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.