CLEAR Annual Report 2014-2015

Submitted by jyuan@worldbank.org on Wed, 05/11/2016 - 16:36
Image
ar15

As the pages of this annual report reflect, CLEAR has established a global presence with a common cause – engaging in evaluation capacity development and learning from that experience. Although the current report focuses on the specific accomplishments for FY15 (July 2014-June 2015) Center by Center and by the Global Hub, they are the result of longer-term developments, and they highlight how CLEAR aims to contribute to the objective of strengthened M&E systems.

Over time, CLEAR Centers have developed and nurtured partnerships, experimented with and broadened their approaches to capacity development, and strengthened their own capacity to deliver, together with business development locally (for paid services) – all of which have contributed substantially to strengthening the evaluation profession and client organizations’ capacity for M&E. The trajectory in this direction has not been linear and has depended on learning by doing. Nonetheless, as the following pages illustrate, the experiences over time have translated gradually into CLEAR as a whole becoming a more confident and established program with tangible effects on the ground.

Download File
Pdf as plain
Centers for Learning on
Evaluation and Results
Annual Report July 2014–June 2015
Evaluate. Learn. Decide. www.theclearinitiative.org
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results @CLEARInitiative
Evaluate. Learn. Decide.
www.theclearinitiative.org
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results @CLEARInitiative
i
Abbreviations ii
Foreword iii
Introduction 1
Program Components 2
Regional Learning 3
Anglophone Africa 4
South Asia 6
East Asia 8
Francophone Africa 10
Latin America 12
Brazil & Lusphone Africa 14
Global Knowledge 16
APPENDIXES 22
APPENDIX 1: Budget, Activities and Client Ratings 22
APPENDIX 2: CLEAR’s Outcomes and Outputs 28
APPENDIX 3: Overview of Program-Level Tasks and Deliverables 29
APPENDIX 4: Contributions to the Program, and Expenditures and Projections 31
APPENDIX 5: Governance and Management 33
Table of Contents
ii
2IE International Institute for Water and Environmental Engineering
ADB Asian Development Bank
AFDC Asia-Pacific Finance and Development Center
AfrEA African Evaluation Association
BNDES Brazil National Development Bank
CERP Center for Economic Research in Pakistan
CIDE Centro de Investigacion y Docencia Economicas in Mexico
CLEAR Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
CONEVAL National Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy of Mexico
CSO Civil society organization
DPME Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
FIFE International Francophone Forum of Evaluation
GIMPA Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration
ICIMOD International Center for Integrated Mountain Develpment
IEG Independent Evaluation Group
IES Indian Economic Service
IFI International financial institution
IFMR Institute for Financial Management and Research
J-PAL Jameel Poverty Action Lab
KSG Kenya School of Government
LEAP Learning from performance
M&E Monitoring and evaluation
MEF Ministry of Economy and Finance (Peru)
NGO Non-governmental organization
RBM Results-based monitoring
RTE Right to Education Act (India)
SenEval Senegalese Evaluation Association
SHIPDET Shanghai International Program in Development Evaluation Training
SNAI Shanghai National Accounting Institute
TOC Theory of change
Abbreviations
iii
Reflection and learning, and piloting and growth - these
were the themes of the CLEAR partnership’s work throughout
the 2014-15 period.
CLEAR Centers were busy – and they reached and worked
with important partners: Over 200 activities in over 21
countries involved more than 2,042 individuals through
training, workshops, and roundtables. Topics ranged from
strengthening state government M&E practices to creating
a new cadre of highly trained professionals to deliver M&E
services. More and more, clients of high-quality training
offerings came back, seeking from their CLEAR center
technical advisory services. CLEAR clients included top
bureaucrats from central and state government, academics
from highly reputable institutions, influential grassroots
non-profit leaders and staff, and accomplished professionals
from the international development field.
As a group, the CLEAR initiative re-shaped itself in light
of the recommendations we had received from our midterm
evaluation (disclosed in October 2014). We re-worked
our theory of change, to reflect a stronger emphasis on
CLEAR to be a “learning partnership” as much as a “delivery
partnership”. A new governance structure is ensuring that
we can operate with flat hierarchies and more collegially.
We also introduced new formats for business reviews so as
to systematically learn from the performance of our various
activities and take mindful decisions going forward.
Ensuring that our theory of change inspires all we do, we
are beginning to manage our activities along business lines
that respond specifically to intermediate outcomes, helping
us formulate specific strategies adjusted to client type and
delivery modalities.
The CLEAR centers’ leaders and staff are pioneers in what
they do, and this Annual Report documents in many ways
their hard work, creativity and curiosity. The initiative has
moved from its “proof of concept” phase to the “start-up”
phase; as a group, we are now beginning to build a deeper
understanding of “what works” and “why”, and the big task
for the next 12 months will be to systematically share this
learning while at the same time experimenting with newer
models and creating content that can be used by other
agencies that work towards the same goal as CLEAR –
strengthening M&E systems and capacities. Each Center has
demonstrated the ability to persevere despite hurdles and
to be resourceful and ingenious in its approach, and the
CLEAR Global team has contributed through conscientious
program management and by creating an environment
for inclusive thought leadership. Jointly, we extend our
sincere gratitude to the CLEAR Board members who have
contributed ardently to CLEAR’s core strategy and guided
us through critical policy decisions.
The CLEAR initiative is set to grow – with and through its
partners and clients. This annual report serves as a comprehensive
reference guide to anyone interested in the CLEAR
program, but also anyone interested in Evaluation Capacity
Development more broadly. We welcome your support and
engagement as CLEAR now moves forward, building on the
early years’ pilots and experiments, more confident than
before as to where and how real impact can be delivered.
Monika Weber-Fahr
Chair, CLEAR Council
Senior Manager
Independent Evaluation Group of the
World Bank Group
Foreword
iv
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR) is
a unique global monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity
development program that brings together academic institutions,
think tanks, foundations, and multi- and bilateral
development organizations to work towards fostering the
use of evidence in decision making.
At the forefront are the CLEAR Centers - six reputable academic
institutions/think tanks with the mandate to work locally and
regionally to deliver, and promote the replication of, effective
evaluation capacity development services. The Global Hub,
housed at the Independent Evaluation Group of the World
Bank, is hosting the program and providing strategic and
operational guidance. The core of CLEAR’s work is to build
M&E capacity. Key beneficiaries of the program include government
agencies, civil society organizations, as well as other
providers of M&E capacity development services.
The specific objectives of the program are to:
• Select and support a limited number of academic
institutions or think tanks (“the Centers”) around the
world to set up programs designed to develop M&E
capacity, through outreach, influence, and developing
and delivering innovative, responsive, contextually relevant,
and cost-effective capacity building services in
M&E, both in their own countries, and, as appropriate,
in other countries on a regional or sub-regional basis.
• Actively manage and drive the exchange of ideas and
knowledge on M&E systems and methods as well as on
the “how” of M&E capacity building interventions based
on the contribution of Centers. This work can inspire and
inform practitioners in government and civil society,
to build M&E capacity in their respective contexts and
organizations.
Through these objectives, CLEAR aims to contribute to longerterm
outcomes of strengthened M&E systems and the use of
M&E information to make policy and program decisions in
government, civil society, and the private sector.
CLEAR’s new theory of change, effective as of April 24,
2015, reflects the dual nature of the program: delivery of
knowledge services and learning from experience on the
“how to” of evaluation capacity development (see Figure 1).
As the pages of this annual report reflect, CLEAR has established
a global presence with a common cause – engaging
in evaluation capacity development and learning from that
experience.
Although the current report focuses on the specific accomplishments
for FY15 (July 2014-June 2015) Center by Center
and by the Global Hub, they are the result of longer-term
developments, and they highlight how CLEAR aims to contribute
to the objective of strengthened M&E systems. Over
time, CLEAR Centers have developed and nurtured partnerships,
experimented with and broadened their approaches to
capacity development, and strengthened their own capacity
to deliver, together with business development locally (for
paid services) – all of which have contributed substantially
to strengthening the evaluation profession and client organizations’
capacity for M&E. The trajectory in this direction
has not been linear and has depended on learning by doing.
Nonetheless, as the following pages illustrate, the experiences
over time have translated gradually into CLEAR as a whole
becoming a more confident and established program with
tangible effects on the ground.
Introduction
Latin America South Asia
1
Figure 1. CLEAR Theory of Change
South Asia
CLEAR Theory of Change
High-Level Outcomes (long-term effects that CLEAR contributes to)
Monitoring and evaluation information is increasingly used to make policy and program decisions
Monitoring and evaluation systems are strengthened
Outcomes
(by 2018)
CLEAR Centers are
financially and
institutionally viable
Activities
Centers’ portfolio includes a balance of new and mature products and services
Outputs
Communications
and networking
Governance and
management
Funds and
resources
People and
expertise
Inputs/Assets
CLEAR Global Knowledge Hub and iCLEAR aggregrate CLEAR’s knowledge
services and products and host a vibrant community of practice for the Centers
CLEAR Centers produce and deliver
relevant and high-quality knowledge
services and products for strategic
clients on M&E systems, approaches,
methods, tools, and findings
CLEAR Centers produce and deliver relevant and
high-quality knowledge services and products
for other M&E capacity providers on what CLEAR
has learned about “how to” and “what works”
in developing capacity
Strategic clients gain awareness of,
knowledge in, and the motivation
to use, M&E approaches, methods,
tools, and findings
Actual and potential M&E capacity providers
gain awareness of, knowledge in, and the
motivation to use, CLEAR’s services and
knowledge regarding “how to” and
“what works” in developing capacity
Delivery of knowledge services and products
Learning emerging from experience delivering knowledge services and products
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
Vision
Evaluate. Learn. Decide.
Mission
CLEAR is a global team. We aim to improve policy decisions through
strengthening monitoring and evaluation systems and capacities. We
innovate, test and learn locally and regionally. We share and inspire globally.
Legend: n Delivery n Learning n Combination Revised April 2015
2
Regional Learning
Regional learning is designed and implemented by the CLEAR
Centers which are housed in institutions that the CLEAR program
selected competitively. The Centers focus on the “evaluation
capacity gap” at regional and local levels and — often in partnership
with other organizations — provide applied, practical,
innovative, and cost-effective M&E capacity building services
in the region in which they are based. Working with key clients
and influential stakeholders, the Centers aspire to contribute
to two near-term outcomes:
• Strategic clients gaining awareness of, knowledge in, and
the motivation to use, M&E approaches, methods, tools,
and findings.
• M&E capacity providers gaining awareness of, knowledge in,
and the motivation to use CLEAR’s services and knowledge
regarding “how to” and “what works” in developing capacity.
As of 2015, CLEAR’s network comprised six centers—based in
Africa, Asia, and Latin America—and their partners (see Figure 2).
Global Knowledge
The second component of the program comprises setting up
and managing a “Global Knowledge Hub” and driving global
knowledge sharing and peer-to-peer learning activities both
among the Centers and more broadly. The knowledge sharing
is focused on innovations in M&E capacity development
that are being tested and delivered by CLEAR Centers and
their partners and clients around the world. The Hub aims to
generate cross-regional collaboration and to build a vibrant
community of practice.
Program Components
Figure 2. CLEAR Centers
Francophone Africa Anglophone Africa
3
Regional learning is designed and delivered by the Centers.
Each center operates in its own environment, develops its
own specific strategies and business lines. These are aimed
at specific clients to contribute to achieving CLEAR’s overall
outcomes. The strategies are based on regional needs, the
opportunities the environment presents, the technical
capacities in the region, and the financial resources available.
The Centers invest through a variety of capacity building
modalities such as collaboration with communities of practice,
mentoring, knowledge exchange, technical assistance and
training.
The Centers also engage in internal learning to develop their
technical and management capacities to eventually attain
financial and institutional viability.
In FY15 CLEAR Centers served in 21 countries and enrolled
participants for training and knowledge exchange programs
from many more. From July 2014 to June 2015, the Centers
delivered 200 activities (155 external for clients and 45
internal for building the Centers’ capacities) and reached 2,042
participants (see Figures 3 and 4).
The following sections summarize and highlight the
Centers’ work in FY15. Appendix 1 provides additional details.
Regional Learning
Figure 3. 155 External Activities Delivered in 21 Countries*
2,042 clients from government,
civil society groups/NGOs, and academia.
Figure 4. 2,042 Clients Reached
Applied research, evaluation,
and knowledge products
Training/Workshops
Technical assistance/advisory
services
Knowledge sharing
Scholarships, internships, or
grants
Network development
Evaluation
Advocacy
Knowledge resourse
1
Other
3242410243263A 37
15
37
37
10
4 16
TYPE OF ACTIVITY
South Asia Latin America
5
3
155
*Does not include internal (Center capacity building) activities.
4
Highlights
Building Parliamentary M&E Capacity to Improve National Oversight
and Accountability
Parliamentary portfolio committees and the advisors and budget officers who support
them are in a unique position-they can act as change agents for evidence-driven
oversight and decision making. Developing their evaluation capacity has the potential
for positive “spill over” to public representatives and officials.
In this context CLEAR Anglophone
Africa and the Department
of Planning, Monitoring
and Evaluation (DPME) of the
Presidency have embarked on
a joint program to strengthen
regional parliamentary oversight
capacity for using M&E
information. In FY15, they held
a workshop for 60 committee
members of the South African
Parliament.
Participants learned about
using M&E approaches and tools for internal functions and developing M&E frameworks
for external monitoring of government priorities. They looked at ways to both
track decisions of multiple committees in both houses and access data from different
sources to support committees’ work.
At the workshop, participants identified the many challenges for effective M&E and
identified the following as positive interventions to take the M&E of committees and
Parliament forward: set up a working group to develop a specific M&E program and
system for Parliament; establish an M&E community of practice/learning network;
develop workshops to deal with specific training needs; provide technical support;
and develop cutting-edge M&E tools.
CLEAR Anglophone Africa and DPME have incorporated these elements into an
expanded and ambitious joint program to support activities in these key areas with
the legislature. Interventions will be designed with other parliaments in the region to
further strengthen parliamentary institutions with both technical M&E and advisory
support.
Promoting Evaluation Culture and Systems
CLEAR Anglophone Africa contributed to the strengthening of the evaluation culture
in South Africa and beyond through a partnership with the DPME. The partnership
promotes dialogue between public officials on evaluation policy and norms and is
underpinned with a range of technical assistance and capacity building services.
AT A GLANCE
BACKGROUND
• Operational: May 2011
• Host Institution: University of
Witwatersrand, South Africa
• Affiliate Centers: Kenya School of
Government and the Ghana Institute of
Management and Public Administration
KEY BUSINESS LINES TO ACHIEVE
OUTCOMES
• Provide country in-service training/
strategy development based on the
government M&E policy
• Establish partnerships with key
academic institutions and service
providers to respond to demand for
impact evaluation & other advanced
technical methods trainings
• Establish partnership with key academic
institutions, Voluntary Organization
of Professional Evaluators to develop
and deliver certificate-level and
postgraduate M&E courses
Applied research, evaluation, and
knowledge products
Training/Workshops
Technical assistance/advisory services
Anglophone Africa
30+4030A
FY15 External Activities*
4 5
4
13
KEY PARTNERS AND CLIENTS
• Department of Monitoring and
Evaluation, South Africa
• South African Monitoring and
Evaluation Association
• The Japan International Cooperation
Agency
• WITS School of Governance
• South African Legislature
Please see Appendix 1A for additional details.
*Does not include internal (Center capacity building) activities.
5
Involvement with the Center: Last year my unit received
support from CLEAR in conducting M&E training for parliamentary
advisors and researchers, building on the previous
year’s partnership in conducting training for parliamentarians.
We also collaborate in hosting the forum of Schools of Public
Administration, to provide advice on how to continuously
develop M&E skills and research for improving application of
theory in government.
Application of Learning: As somebody who has interacted
closely with CLEAR Anglophone Africa since its establishment,
I have learned a lot from them in international best practice
on various aspects of results-based monitoring (RBM). CLEAR
provided training and brought international experts to advise
us on how to implement RBM and M&E better. We have also
used their expertise to share knowledge and tools with M&E
practitioners in government. Facilitation of parliamentary training
has been extremely well received.
CLEAR’s Influence: The CLEAR emphasis on learning rather than
punitive measures in applying RBM and M&E is something that
has influenced how we build capacity on M&E. Parliamentary
training is high impact and extremely useful for stimulating
demand for use of M&E evidence for decision-making. CLEAR
has been instrumental in supporting the national evaluation
system in South Africa as an independent broker and a resource.
In FY15 the Center also partnered on a regional initiative:
“Twende Mbele” an ambitious three-year partnership with the
Department for International Development on strengthening
performance M&E with the relevant directorates in South
Africa, Benin and Uganda and with a lead role for the Center as
implementing agent. The initiative aims to build African M&E
practice through networking, peer lesson learning, and common
development of M&E systems beginning with South Africa,
Benin, and Uganda and extending to new countries within the
three-year time frame of the project. FY15 has seen constant
liaison with the three country partners in preparation for the
commencement of the program.
Partnership with SAMEA to Equip New Evaluators
with Practical Evaluation Skills
As part of its partnership with South African Monitoring and
Evaluation Association (SAMEA), CLEAR Anglophone Africa
piloted a two-day workshop for prospective evaluation practitioners
during the SAMEA annual meeting. The workshop recapped
key elements in the evaluation process and the fundamentals
of evaluation before taking the group through a structured
and exercise-based set of practical tools and approaches. Participants
also were required to conduct or manage a formal
evaluation as part of their work or study program. The Center
and SAMEA pre-selected the 25 participants and provided them
with scholarships for travel, accommodation, and attendance.
The participants were new public sector evaluation managers,
consultants, and post graduate students with formal training in
M&E but no practical experience in conducting an evaluation.
Client Profile
Stanley Ntakumba, Acting Deputy Director, DPME
Background: I am the Acting
Deputy Director-General, Institutional
Performance Monitoring
and Evaluation, DPME. I
have a technical role in planning,
M&E capacity development,
and knowledge management,
as well as a managerial
responsibility of heading one
of the four branches of DPME.
I am also the Deputy Chair of
the South African Monitoring
and Evaluation Association.
Challenges and Areas of Attention for FY16
The partnership has been heavily focused on South Africa, due to its
location and close relationship with the South African Department
for Performance Management and Evaluation (DPME), which has
benefitted the Center thus far. However, the Center intends to
counterbalance and expand this focus through the Twende Mbele
program and by reaching out across other countries more actively.
The Center also plans to begin obtaining more comprehensive
follow-on feedback on its work, in addition to the immediate postactivity
data it collects from clients, to better inform its programming
and customize its services to meet clients’ needs and demands.
Change in leadership and staff at the Center, with the interim
Director and some staff leaving and a new Director and staff being
appointed, affected the volume of the Center’s work. The new
Director is establishing the Center’s strategic directions and putting
in place a full complement of technical expertise needed to deliver
on its goals.
Stanley Ntakumba,
Acting Deputy Director, DPME
6
Highlights
Strengthening Knowledge of Impact Evaluation at the Indian
Economic Services
The Indian Economic Services (IES) is a highly esteemed branch of the Indian civil
services. It was created in 1961 to undertake economic analysis, render advice for
designing development policies, strengthen delivery systems, and monitor and
evaluate public policies and programs. It has the authority to conduct and
commission evaluations on government policies.
However, despite this
mandate and function,
the use of evidence in
scaling up government
programs is limited,
sporadic and untimely.
While the IES has been
conducting and commissioning
evaluations, Government
of India programs
are still being scaled-up at a
fast rate without sufficient
evidence.
In 2013, the then Chief Economic Adviser to the Indian Ministry of Finance, Raghuram
Rajan, approached CLEAR to train IES staff on how to use rigorous evaluations (particularly
impact evaluations) for decision making. This has resulted in an annual CLEAR
M&E training for IES entry-level officers since 2013 and mid-level officers since 2014.
The CLEAR Center has thus conducted four training events, (2013–15), combining
technical lectures, case studies, guest lectures from prominent government officials
and M&E professionals, and group work to design impact evaluations. Through these
sessions, CLEAR South Asia aims to identify and train champions who will build
awareness about impact evaluation methods and techniques in their respective
departments and advocate for a higher number of evaluations. The feedback from
these workshops has been positive.
”The methodology that is followed presently is very good as it is participatory in
nature. It is an excellently planned course.” — IES Probationers training participant 2013
“One of the best trainings we had so far!” —IES Probationers training participant 2014
“Impact evaluation has a lot to do with our evaluation process at our work place and
the knowledge gained here will be helpful.” —IES Mid-Level training participant 2015
Going forward the Center is developing several steps to assess the effectiveness of
its trainings, including developing tracer surveys of past participants. The surveys
AT A GLANCE
BACKGROUND
• Operational: April 2011
• Host Institution: Jameel Poverty Action
Lab South Asia (J-PAL) at the Institute
for Financial Management and
Research (IFMR), India
• Affiliate Center: Center for Economic
Research in Pakistan (CERP)
KEY BUSINESS LINES TO ACHIEVE
OUTCOMES
• Build skills/awareness for high quality
impact evaluation and data collection
• Strengthen state government M&E
practices
• Advocate for high quality M&E
• Strengthen regional and international
M&E networks
KEY PARTNERS AND CLIENTS
• Ministry of Finance, Government of
India
• Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy
Government of India
• Government of Tamil Nadu
• Government of Haryana
• Education Alliance
• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
• UN Women
• Breakthrough
• ICIMOD Nepal
• Community of Evaluators South Asia
• Sri Lanka Evaluation Association
• Pratham
South Asia
122+192428132A
FY15 External Activities*
77
Advocacy
Training/Workshops
Technical assistance/advisory services
Knowledge sharing
Knowledge resourse
Network development
Evaluation
Other
1 1 2
21
17
3
18
14
7
Client Profile
The ASER Centre (www.asercentre.org)
Background: Pratham, India’s largest education nongovernment
organization, has 10 years of experience in
collecting learning outcome data of over 600,000 children a
year as part of the ASER. The ASER Centre aims to strengthen
the link between evidence and action by: (1) building
the grassroots actors’ capacity to understand outcome
assessments; and (2) serving as a role model by generating
evidence using simple yet rigorous methods on outcomes
in education and other social sector programs. In fact, the
world ASER itself means “impact” in Hindi!
As part of its work, ASER has increasingly focused on building
state- and district-level capacity of government, civil society,
and academic institutions to carry out the annual survey.
However, in several geographic areas, developing local M&E
capacity has proven challenging.
CLEAR South Asia and the ASER Centre developed a plan
to work in the northeastern states of India to build capacity
to conduct assessments based on good sampling and
understanding of the ASER instrument, to generate reliable
data on learning outcomes, and ultimately to create an
environment where local policy and planning can be based
will systematically track how IES participants are using the
knowledge to further enhance the role of evaluation in government
decision making.
Building Capacity for Grassroots M&E
Pratham, one of India’s largest education non profits, is an
important strategic partner for CLEAR, given its focus on
results and influence in the education sector in India. Since
2014, CLEAR has been working with the ASER (Annual
Status of Education Report) Center, an assessment, survey,
evaluation and research unit of Pratham, on a grassroots M&E
capacity building initiative.
The capacity building workshops through this initiative
focus on developing state- and district-level professionals’
understanding of the Right to Education (RTE) Act and
secondary data of school learning outcomes; how tools
can be created to collect primary data to measure RTE
implementation and learning levels in schools; and how data
can be analyzed, synthesized, understood, and presented.
CLEAR South Asia is also commissioning an independent
evaluation to assess the effectiveness of this approach.
As part of this work, in February 2015, CLEAR’s “Translating
Policy into Practice” capacity building workshops introduced
the concept of measurement and analysis in the context
of a specific education policy to master’s students in Social
Work at the Tata Institutes of Social Science. This workshop
provided participants with a first exposure to how evidence
is generated, analyzed, and presented. Classroom and field
sessions were both incorporated to help participants think
about the interplay between inputs and processes and how
these influence learning outcomes. A post-workshop field
assignment was also given so the participants could apply
their learning from the workshop in their work environments.
Challenges and Areas of Attention for FY16
The demand for capacity building and also evaluation services has
increased considerably in South Asia over the years, but the Center
currently faces staffing constraints. The Center is considering
further expanding its network of professionals to provide both
services and also refine its strategy to expand its cost-recovery and
revenue-generation models.
The Center’s work is informed through extensive consultations
with key stakeholders in government, civil society, academia, and
the M&E community. These consultations have been valuable in
the design of the workprogram, but representation is also needed
from Pakistan and Bangladesh. In addition, deeper information
is needed about how the Center’s services are contributing to its
longer –term objectives. To this end, the Center will institute a more
extensive M&E system to better understand how to improve its
strategy and services, in addition to continuing to collect postactivity
feedback.
8
Highlights
Cultivating an “Evaluation” Mindset among High-Level Policymakers
CLEAR East Asia has long held successful Shanghai International Program of Development
Evaluation trainings, and courses for technical government and civil society staff
on rigorous approaches,
and special topics related
to methods of evaluation.
But what about the mid
to high-ranking officials
who are the policymakers
and major drivers of
evaluation? For them, the
technical details do not
matter as much as the
general concepts, theories,
and use of evaluation
in the practical sense.
The Center believes it is
important to target these officials, to raise their awareness
and foster positive attitudes around evaluation—that is, to create a more favorable
culture for using evaluation findings to improve policy making.
So, with long-time partner the Asia-Pacific Community of Practice on Managing
for Development Results of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Center held
two workshops targeting mid to high-level government officials, in October and
November 2014. The workshops emphasized basic theories, concepts, frameworks,
and methods of conducting evaluation as well as using evaluation findings to inform
policy decisions.
The second workshop in Nanning, Guangxi Province, attracted 56 participants
from the Ministry of Finance as well as line ministries of 13 other countries in South
Asia and Southeast Asia, including 20 participants from the local Guangxi Finance
Department and other finance bureaus in Guangxi. Four international participants
from Cambodia and Vietnam were sponsored with a CLEAR grant.
Several factors were critical to the workshop’s success:
• High quality of core faculty: Instructors came from the Independent Evaluation
Department of ADB and International Initiative on Impact Evaluation and
BRAC, China. Faculty were also adept in presentation skills and conducting
group discussions.
• Site visits for real-world application: Participants took a half-day field trip to
the project site of the Ecological Protection Project of Qingxiu Mountain Forest
Park in Nanning. Participants applied what they had learned in the formal
classroom setting to actual project evaluation.
AT A GLANCE
BACKGROUND
• Operational: July 2012
• Host Institution: Asia-Pacific Finance
and Development Institute (AFDI),
China
KEY BUSINESS LINES TO ACHIEVE
OUTCOMES
• Build and strengthen M&E capacities
through training in the government
agencies, academia and civil society
• Incorporate evaluation in the
curriculum of graduate course to reach
out to potential young professionals
• Focus on evaluation consultancy
and advisory services to strengthen
organizations’ M&E system.
KEY PARTNERS AND CLIENTS
• Asian Development Bank
• Ministry of Finance Department of
International Economic & Financial
Cooperation
• National Reform and Development
Commission Department of Western
Development
• Shanghai Finance Bureau
East Asia
4555A
FY15 External Activities
6
5 11
Training/Workshops
Technical assistance/advisory services
Please see Appendix 1C for additional details.
*Does not include internal (Center capacity building) activities.
9
Client Profile
Ms. Liang Suping, Professor in Accounting at
Guangxi University of Finance and Economics
Background: I am a professor in Accounting at the Guangxi
University of Finance and Economics.
Experience with the Center: Training from CLEAR has
expanded my knowledge and responsibilities in evaluation.
Before I attended the course, I had professional experience in
accounting and auditing but no systematic training in conducting
M&E. At the beginning of training, I learned the logic
model, and over time more about international practices for
evaluation in China.
Professional Growth: Now I have several years of experience
conducting evaluation of IFI projects for different provinces. I
also launched Guangxi University of Finance—China’s southwestern
performance evaluation center. It is dedicated to the
research and practice of performance evaluation of IFI loan
projects and fiscal funds, and social impact of M&E. The center
currently has a team of seven researchers. I was honored to be
invited back to the center to share my experience in evaluation
with IFI projects.
Thoughts on the Training: The curriculum is well designed. The
faculty are experienced in conducting performance evaluation
of IFI projects and they share lessons with participants. After
several years of training, finance officials have good knowledge
of performance evaluation. What they need to improve going
forward is related to hands-on application, which has been
given a lot of consideration in the curriculum.
• Experience sharing and reflection: Participants shared
their country experiences and held a final panel discussion
to recap what they had learned and how they were
going to apply it. This reflective thinking helped them to
synthesize and reinforce their learning.
Participants noted positive gains from this workshop. Mr.
Abdul Haseeb Arabzai, Head of Policy and Poverty Analysis
Department, General Directorate of Policy & Results-Based
Monitoring, Ministry of Economy of Afghanistan, said, “During
the workshop, I got an idea that we all have been suffering from
identical challenges and problems. Therefore, if we situate our
efforts in one direction, we will certainly resolve our challenges
and move the development and prosperous trend of Asia to
the highest peak.”
Strengthening Chinese Government Agencies’
Focus on Evaluation
In addition to training, the Center has focused on providing
research and advisory services to government agencies. They
have been involved with research on performance evaluation
with the International Poverty Reduction Center in China,
finance bureau of the Min Hang district of Shanghai, and
Shanghai urban planning administration. CLEAR East Asia
also engaged in the performance evaluation of fiscal funds in
China. Center director Ms. Zhao Min has taken on the role of
the leader of an expert panel for performance evaluation of the
fiscal fund of 10 districts, which contributes to strengthening
M&E systems in China.
Networking Evaluation Professionals
Since participants come from across China and about 30 organizations,
management and communications can become
quite challenging. This year, the Center used Wechat, the most
popular mobile text and voice messaging communication app
in China, to create a space for participants to discuss evaluation
questions and ask questions of instructors. Seventy-five
people, including faculty, joined this virtual space. Also, for
the first time, the Center used Surveymonkey to collect course
feedback. The Center posted the link to the Wechat space so
participants could easily access the survey form, which saved
time spent on data collection.
Challenges and Areas of Attention for FY16
Recruitment of professionals to work with the Center on an
ongoing basis has been a challenge due to the competitive
private sector market in Shanghai. The Center is actively reaching
out to University professors and freelance consultants to establish
a network that can support the Center’s work.
Another challenge has been to institute appropriate mechanisms
to select participants for the Center’s advanced technical courses.
The Center is developing improved selection methods to ensure a
proper match between participants and the courses.
Tracer studies of clients are also envisaged in the coming year
to provide a more comprehensive picture of the quality and
relevance of the Center’s work and to use this information for
future programming and outreach activities.
10
Highlights
Raising Media Awareness on Advocacy for Public Policy Evaluation
Media professionals can play a strategic role in the advocacy and dissemination
of evaluative culture. They can promote public policy evaluation as a requirement
for democracy and the guarantee of public action effectiveness. As part of its work
in building champions for M&E and recognizing that media can be catalysts for
change, the CLEAR Francophone center organized an awareness workshop for
media professionals on October 25, 2014, in Dakar, Senegal.
Twenty-three journalists, mostly Senegalese, attended the workshop, including 10
women representing local and international media groups (all media categories
were represented: print, television, radio, and web). The workshop was facilitated
by Mrs. Eugenie Aw Ndiaye, former Secretary General of the Association of African
Communications Professionals, former Director of the Center for Study of Information
Sciences and Techniques,
and consultant
for the UN. The President
of the Senegalese
Evaluation Association
(SenEval), the President
of the Francophone
Network for Evaluation,
the Vice President of The
International Organization
for Cooperation in
Evaluation (IOCE) and
the director of CLEAR
Francophone Africa
were facilitators.
Through a series of
presentations, a diagnostic analysis of Senegalese
governance system was followed by a talk-debate time; media learned about the
issues and challenges of evaluation and discussed the role of media in promoting
evaluation and using evidence to inform policy decisions. The media professionals
discussed how they could highlight evaluation as good for public governance
and development and support the institutionalization of the evaluation process
in Francophone countries.
This activity was organized as part of the strategic partnership between SenEval
and CLEAR Francophone for the preparation of the first International Francophone
Forum of Evaluation (FIFE) in Dakar, which the Francophone Network of Evaluation
held October 27–30, 2014. The forum gathered more than 300 evaluators from
around the world.
AT A GLANCE
BACKGROUND
• Operational: December 2012
• Host Institution: Centre African
d’Etudes Superieures en Gestion
(CESAG), Senegal
• Affiliate Centers: International
Institute for Water and Environmental
Engineering (2IE), Burkino Faso
KEY BUSINESS LINES TO ACHIEVE
OUTCOMES
• Build critical mass of M&E professionals
in key agencies
• Identify and increase M&E champions
to strengthen country M&E systems
• Equip other ECD providers to deliver
high quality M&E services
• Diagnose evaluation capacity in focus
countries
KEY PARTNERS AND CLIENTS
• Cellule de Suivi de l’Action
Gouvernementale / Niger
• Bureau Organisation et Méthodes /
Sénégal
• Ministère de l’Intégration Africaine, du
NEPAD et de la Promotion de la Bonne
Gouvernance / Sénégal
• Ministère de l’Economie et des
Finances / Sénégal
• Association Sénégalaise d’évaluation
• Réseau Francophone d’Evaluation
• Institut International d’Ingénierie de
l’Eau et de l’Environnement / Burkina
Faso
Francophone Africa
Training/Workshops
Network development
Knowledge sharing
Advocacy
Knowledge resourse
Others
27379999A
FY15 External Activities
4
3
11
1
1
1
1
Please see Appendix 1D for additional details.
*Does not include internal (Center capacity building) activities.
11
Client Profile
Mr. Abdoul Aziz Kane, Secretary General, SenEval
Background: I have over 15 years of experience of consultancy/
training in project management, strategic and operational
planning, and M&E. I am the Secretary General of SenEval. I
am also a member of the African Community of Practice of
development results-based management and I contributed
to the development of its local branch in Senegal.
How I got Involved: Since I am a member of SenEval’s executive
office and FIFE’s national organizing committee, I was invited
to take part in CLEAR Francophone’s awareness workshop for
journalists held at FIFE, which looked at the key concepts of
evaluation and its fundamental issues. This matches the mandate
of the SenEval association.
Thoughts on the Activity: Most of the journalists found the
workshop very informative and useful. The journalists asked
relevant questions, reflecting their interest and clear desire to
better fulfill their mission in the promotion and popularization
of the culture of evaluation. This proves that the workshop
achieved its objectives, and this is what I take from the event.
Also, the section on the dissemination of evaluation results
was greatly appreciated.
Developing Young Evaluators
Evaluation is a growing field in Africa, which speaks well for
the emergence and future of evaluation practice in the region.
To support young evaluators’ professional development and
integration, CLEAR Francophone held a workshop in September
2014, “Young Evaluators: Challenges and Prospects.” More
than 70 participants shared experiences and strategies. Strong
connections were established between the young and more
experienced evaluators.
The activity was organized into three sessions: A “mapping”
of career opportunities and recent innovations for emerging
evaluators in the region; the “debunking of the evaluator’s job”
through experience of senior evaluators; and tools and tips
to increase the leadership and professional development of
young graduates.
Safyatou Diallo, a young evaluator, said, “The mapping was
one of the highlights of the seminar. An experienced evaluator
and an auditor who is looking for experience in the field
of evaluation shared their experiences with us. Their advice
gave us ideas for the next steps of our career.”
Advertising Civil Society Association
The Permanent Secretary of the Civil Society Associations
Gambia, a coalition of seven Gambian civil and human rights
organizations, has the duty to provide technical support to
the ministries and services attached to the Prime Minister on
(1) planning programming, and M&E and (2) reporting tools
and analysis of their performance. The director requested
CLEAR Francophone support to strengthen staff capacity
to properly fulfill its mission. CLEAR Francophone provided
technical advice followed by a targeted training for 36 participants,
including eight women. The audience comprised
executives from the government’s Action Monitoring Unit
in Niger and the Directors of Studies and Forecasting from
technical ministries.
Challenges and Areas of Attention for FY16
The Center faced severe challenges with implementing the
number of activities planned due to shortage of qualified
professionals in the region and staffing constraints. The Center
is developing a more realistic implementation plan and also
plans to recruit additional staff.
The Center continues to receive demand for services but the
ability willingness to pay is low. To shift towards longer-term
financial viability, the Center will examine alternative costrecovery
and revenue-generation models as part of its strategy
moving forward.
12
Highlights
Using Evaluation to Shape Climate Change Policy
Climate change policy is a global challenge that poses new, formidable, political
and methodological challenges for M&E. CLEAR Latin America and the Office of
Evaluation and Oversight of the Inter-American Development Bank jointly organized
the International Seminar on Climate Change and
Development in
Latin America
(Mexico City, May
18–19, 2015) in
order to advance
knowledge and
interdisciplinary
dialogue on recent
a d v a n c e m e n t s
and pressing challenges
that Latin
America faces in
the field of climate
change policy.
Although the seminar was open to the public to spread knowledge in climate change,
development, and evaluation, the target audience was high-level policy makers
from entities and organizations responsible for development and climate change
agendas. Presenters were decision makers and stakeholders directly involved in
evaluation and climate change policy-making, research and/or advocacy.
The seminar stood out for a diverse composition of presenters (government, civil
society and private sector), a carefully targeted audience, and a dynamic format
that promoted interaction and inclusion. The sessions featured one presenter and
three to four commentators, with a renowned expert as moderator, and time for
audience participation.
In parallel, seminar organizers sought wider outreach and knowledge dissemination
through live streaming and simultaneous translation to boost participation (in
person 114, and virtual 549), made presentations and reports publicly available at no
cost, and created a network space for decision makers to connect with participants.
Participants greatly appreciated the opportunity to share experiences or learn more
about climate change evaluation. Raquel Gutiérrez Nájera, Ph.D., said, “Thank you
for the great organization and for opening this space to the Social Counselors of
the National Institute of Ecology and Climate Change.”
AT A GLANCE
BACKGROUND
• Operational: June 2012
• Host Institution: Centro de
Investigación y Docencia Económicas
A.C. (CIDE), Mexico
KEY BUSINESS LINES TO ACHIEVE
OUTCOMES
• Strengthen M&E systems, practices
and skills
• Promote peer-learning mechanisms
and knowledge sharing on M&E
• Strengthen regional and international
M&E networks
• Build partnerships and alliances with
other ECD providers
• KEY PARTNERS AND CLIENTS
• Ministry of Economy and Finance, Peru
• Ministry of Health, Mexico City
• Consumer Protection Agency, Mexico
• National Council for the Evaluation of
Social Development Policy, Mexico
• Red Latino Americana y del Caribe de
Monitoreo y el Caribe
Latin America
14+21144155A
FY15 External Activities
18
6
6
43 9
2 2
Training/Workshops
Technical assistance/advisory services
Knowledge sharing
Scholarships, internships, or grants
Network development
Knowledge resourse
Please see Appendix 1E for additional details.
*Does not include internal (Center capacity building) activities.
13
Experience with the Center: I was invited to South Africa to
participate in a roundtable on the use of evidence in public
policy. I also organized a course with CLEAR Latin America on
results-oriented budgeting for the MEF staff.
Application of Learning: One lesson I have learned is the
importance of setting guidelines and protocols to provide
regular technical assistance to those who use M&E tools in
public program implementation. Creating M&E systems without
training can easily lead to failure. This helped us to improve
the management of evidence that our evaluations produced.
Thoughts on Experience: The quality of CLEAR Latin America’s
technical assistance is really high level because of the team’s
expertise, contact and resources. An example of this was their
technical assistance for an international consulting project on
systematizing improvements in performance and expenditure
evaluations, an M&E tool of the results-based budgeting we
created in 2008. CLEAR Latin America led us to instructor
Orlando Gracia, former director of SINERGIA (Colombian Evaluation
System), who provided great recommendations for our
evaluations. We presented the project’s results to the Deputy
Minister of Finance at the ministry in Peru and the Director
General of Public Budget. Gracia’s recommendations were followed
by concrete actions thanks to this technical assistance.
Promoting Evaluation Culture: Mexico Evaluation
Week
Mexico joined the International Year of Evaluation celebrations
with more than 80 activities throughout the country to
promote M&E capacities. The activities (conferences, seminars,
workshops, book and award presentations, hackatons, and
other M&E-related events) were conducted in 12 States of the
Republic and the Federal District, which involved almost 100
government institutions, civil society organizations, evaluators,
and decision makers; altogether, the activities had an
approximate attendance of more than 2,000 people.
During the inauguration ceremony, the evaluation torch was
lit by representatives of the organizing committee: Claudia
Maldonado, CLEAR Latin America’s General Coordinator;
Juan Manuel Valle, Executive Director of the Mexican Agency
for International Cooperation and Development; Gonzalo
Hernández Licona, Executive Secretary of the National Council
for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy; and Gustavo
Ulloa, Director General for Evaluation of Program Results at
the Ministry of Finance.
Promoting Knowledge Exchange on the
Institutionalization of Evaluation in Central
America
To promote the exchange of experiences regarding the institutionalization
of evaluation in their countries, CLEAR Latin
America held a roundtable for 31 high-level government decision
makers and parliamentary leaders from Central American
countries (El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Panamá, Guatemala,
and Costa Rica). The experience sharing helped these
actors find common ground in using evidence for measuring
and improving policy and program effectiveness and delivering
better development outcomes. It was also beneficial
to start building a community of practice among political
and technical actors within Central America. Each country
developed an action plan and guidelines for future actions.
Client Profile
Mr. Omar Narrea, Coordinator at Ministry of
Economy and Finance, Peru
Background: I am the coordinator for Independent
Evaluations on Results-Based Budgeting at the Ministry of
Economy and Finance (MEF) in Peru. I have been trained
on M&E and project management and also participated in
public programs evaluations.
Challenges and Areas of Attention for FY16
The Center is in an excellent position with increased demand
for M&E capacity development. However, it faces the
challenge of making trade-offs that best advance CLEAR
objectives. The Center will prioritize its efforts in low-income
countries and also develop partnership models that enable
its reach and meet higher levels of demand.
Another challenge is to shift increasingly towards financial
self-sustainability. The Center will address it in a variety of
ways, including increasing its network of professionals who
provide technical expertise cost-effectively. It will also finish
setting up its Regional Advisory Committee and develop a
coherent strategy in consultation with this body.
14
Highlights
Instituting Results-Based Management in ReDes Program
The Votorantim Institute is the corporate social responsibility branch of the Votorantim
Group, a Brazilian enterprise present in more than 20 countries operating in various
sectors, such as metals, mining, steel, energy, and the financial market. ReDes
Program started in 2010 as an initiative from the Votorantim Institute in partnership
with BNDES (National Development Bank), a federal public company, with the
main goal of generating jobs, income and human capital development in Brazilian
municipalities where Votorantim Group operates.
The Votorantim Institute and BNDES were investing a large amount of public and
private resources in ReDes Program—but with no evaluation plan. ReDes did not
have results-based management and no knowledge of the evolution and impacts
of its program in the community. So the Institute reached out to the CLEAR Brazil/
Lusophone center to pursue an evaluation of the program.
Working with CEAPG-FGV (Center for Public Administration and Government Studies,
Fundação Getulio Vargas), CLEAR Brazil/Lusophone provided M&E capacity building,
redesigned the program’s logic model in partnership with the clients, and collaborated
with an Institute team on the survey design and data collection. CLEAR-FGV
proposed a mixed-methods evaluation strategy. Besides applying an innovative
and well-rounded approach that allowed evaluating the program fully, the Center
raised awareness of M&E mixed methods and the importance of institutionalizing
evaluation in operations.
Two crucial elements made this project a success: starting with the logic model to
help the clients understand and organize the project, and having cooperation and
communication between the quantitative and qualitative evaluation teams, so they
shared the same path toward results.
For this project, CLEAR Brazil/Lusophone employed two senior staff on M&E methods,
three junior staff on survey design and 15 associated staff for data collection. This
was an advisory service combined with training in hands-on experience in M&E.
INTRODUCING THE NEWEST
CLEAR CENTER
The CLEAR Brazil and Lusophone Africa
Center is based at Fundação Getulio
Vargas (FGV), a renowned Brazilian
think tank and higher education
institution founded in 1944, dedicated
to promoting Brazil’s economic and
social development. CLEAR Brazil and
Lusophone Africa is formally placed at
FGV´s Sao Paulo School of Economics
and benefits from a multidisciplinary
context with associates from FGV´s
School of Public Administration
and Government and other partner
institutions.
The Center for Learning on Evaluation
and Results for Brazil and Lusophone
Africa (CLEAR-FGV) seeks to promote
and develop subnational and national
M&E capacities and systems in
Lusophone countries.
CLEAR-FGV has a broad line of action,
in order to provide tailor made services
for a wide range of clients, including
governments, private agencies, civil
society, academia, and other M&E
providers. The Center offers basic and
advanced M&E courses to current and
prospective M&E staff, with varying
technical depth. Furthermore, CLEARFGV
contributes to building knowledge
in M&E in Lusophone countries through
developing a series of knowledge
products in Portuguese as well as
promoting seminars and roundtables
to foster the exchange of successful
experiences. The Center also works
jointly with its clients, through technical
assistance and advisory services,
developing M&E methods and systems
and improving the quality of their
current M&E practices.
FORMAL START OF OPERATIONS AND
BUSINESS LINES
The Center is currently designing its
business lines as a CLEAR Center. A
formal announcement of operations
are planned in late September 2015.
Brazil & Lusophone Africa
15
Center Executive Coordinator Profile
Lycia Lima, CLEAR Brazil and Lusophone Africa
Background: I am the executive coordinator of the newest
CLEAR center, for Brazil and Lusophone (Portuguese-speaking)
Africa. I was also one of the organizers involved in the formation
of the Brazilian M&E Network, which has become a very
active association.
Center Plans: We’re planning our center’s inauguration in late
September 2015. We’re based in Brazil, at the Sao Paulo School
of Economics at Fundação Getulio Vargas, and work jointly
with the school´s Center for Applied Microeconomics. Through
CLEAR we’re looking forward to expanding into new areas
and building bridges with the M&E communities in Brazil and
elsewhere. In particular, we’ll be working to advance evaluation
capacity development services and products in Portuguese for
use in Lusophone (Portuguese-speaking) countries, to foster
evidence-based policy making in these countries.
Our Experience: Historically, our team in Brazil has had a lot
of experience in carrying out impact evaluations in all sectors.
Though we specialize in impact evaluation, we have experience
in and appreciate the broader range of M&E approaches and
think that an integrated approach will make our work better.
Lessons in Evaluation: Two pieces of advice I would give
to impact evaluators that you would not
learn in conventional
econometrics books:
(1) Know well the theory of
change of your intervention!
If you don´t know
the theory of change
well, you might not fully
understand the causality
channels and might leave
important impact indicators
out of the analysis.
(2) Do not underestimate
the value of mixed methods.
In particular, qualitative
approaches will help
you understand “why and
how” things happened.
Assisting Organizations with Evaluation
Acreditar – Odebrecht
Odebrecht is a Brazilian company settled in 21 countries with
a wide business range, from engineering and construction to
the industrial and energy sectors. The company’s social responsibility
branch led to investment in several social programs,
namely Acreditar. The Acreditar mission is to capacitate people
in places Odebrecht has venues or carries out business. It seeks,
through the program, to reduce immigration, instruct people
to work in Odebrecht companies and reduce unemployment
through the supply of free non-conditional technical degrees.
The program is being implemented in 11 Brazilian States and
7 other countries and has more than 137,000 of participants
with a total investment of R$44 million.
Odebrecht reached out to CLEAR-FGV to carry out an impact
evaluation of this program. The Center trained an Odebrecht
team on how to develop a questionnaire to construct socio
economic indicator; and helped develop an impact evaluation.
This project provided an opportunity for the team to engage
with a new client and to increase awareness and knowledge
on data collection and program monitoring.
World Food Programme-PNAE
The World Food Program in cooperation with the Programa
Nacional de Alimentação Escolar (PNAE—National Program
of School Feeding) asked CLEAR-FGV to carry out a study on
the total cost of PNAE in Brazil. To assess all types of costs (from
infrastructure to human capital), the team visited schools across
Brazil and is currently interviewing other school representatives
of some states. The purpose of this study was not only to
decompose the cost of PNAE, but also to understand the cost
structure of the program to apply it effectively to other countries.
Vocational Education Training in Brazil
The Inter-American Development Bank asked CLEAR-FGV to
elaborate a diagnosis on vocational education training in Brazil.
The twin goals of the study were: (i) to analyze labor market
outcomes when promoting workers and company productivity
through relevant and cost-effective work force training
mechanisms; and (ii) to compare and share Latin America and
the Caribbean and Korea experiences. Besides the diagnosis
and analysis of particular case studies, the team developed a
video illustrating vocational education training in São Paulo,
including visits to schools and interviews with students.

Lycia Lima, Executive Coordinator,
CLEAR Brazil & Lusophone Africa Center
16
In FY15, CLEAR strengthened the foundations of the global
aspects of the program by updating the program charter and
by revising the theory of change, both of which were formally
adopted at the CLEAR Meeting held on April 24, 2015, hosted
by the German Institute for Development Evaluation in Bonn.
Updated Program Charter
In response to the mid term evaluation completed in early
FY15, CLEAR updated its program charter to better reflect the
partnership nature of the program. The revised charter refines
the CLEAR members’ roles and responsibilities and explicitly
defines the outcomes expected through CLEAR as a delivery
mechanism and knowledge and learning partnership. The
charter also adjusts the governance structure, to reflect the
partnership nature of the program better.
Revised Theory of Change
The revised theory of change (See Figure 1, page 1) focuses
explicitly on both the delivery of M&E capacity development
services and learning about evaluation capacity. One of
CLEAR’s main aims is to and deliver knowledge services and
products on M&E systems, approaches, methods, tools, and
findings. However, equally important is that CLEAR shares
knowledge on “how to” and “what works” in delivering these
services and activities. Thus, the revised theory of change
reflects the importance that the program places on the “how
to” and “what works” or the “learning” aspects, just as much as
on the delivery aspects. Another point of stronger emphasis is
the knowledge aggregation through iCLEAR—CLEAR’s online
knowledge hub and platform to foster a vibrant community
of practice.
CLEAR Growing into Phase II
Moving into FY15, CLEAR established two additional
mechanisms to drive its strategy for global knowledge,
learning and innovation: the Learning from Performance
(LeaP) Reviews and Wikis, in addition to the (established)
annual Global Fora.
CLEAR Wikis
CLEAR initiated the use of wikis to codify and share
knowledge across the Centers. A wiki (meaning: fast) is a
web application that allows collaborative modification,
extension, or deletion of content and structure without a
specific owner, making it a collaborative content-generation
tool. In April 2015, the CLEAR Centers came together in
Bonn and experimented with using a wiki. Work through
wikis was then expanded on CLEAR’s online team platform,
Collaboration for Development, and will continue in FY16 to
promote knowledge sharing and collaboration. (See Box 1,
page 17)
Learning from Performance (LeaP) Reviews
This year, a new performance management and learning
approach was piloted in four Centers, including South Asia,
Latin America, Anglophone Africa, and Francophone Africa,
with reviews and refinement of the approach each time.
The LEAP reviews enable the Centers to assess their entire
portfolio and its performance, surface strategic learning,
and drive innovation. As a result of the reviews, the Centers:
• Attain a comprehensive picture and understanding of
their portfolios.
• Decide which business lines should be started, scaled
up, shifted or stopped, by orienting them along the
theory of change and specific outcomes expected.
Global Knowledge
CLEAR Meeting, Bonn Francophone Africa
17
BOX 1: Wiki Pilot in CLEAR
The CLEAR wiki pilot was designed to foster a continuous flow of collaboration and wiki-work on a range of topics
among the centers. C4D was selected as the pilot platform for CLEAR wikis after a comparison of technology
platforms. Four critical processes guiding this pilot have been designed and will continue into FY16.
1. Wiki sprints. These are center-led bi-weekly reserved time slots. Each center reserves the time space of an hour
to work with one or two staff. The centers can work on their own topics or interact with other centers.
2. Wikithons. These monthly or bi-monthly sessions, facilitated by the Global Hub team. They are dedicated to
accelerating, editing and improving our wikis. They can be combined with a webinar to provide guidance and
capture lessons.
3. Wiki ecosystem. This includes building a wiki culture: a results framework with metrics for success, planning
and capturing of lessons.
4. Consolidation. The pilot results and experiences will be consolidated by the end of FY16. It is expected that
wiki work among the Centers will contribute to articles or blogs for a broader and more external audience.
This year, the Wikis included a variety of topics such as: The Year of Evaluation; Attracting and retaining Center
talent; and Leveraging scholarships: rethinking the scholarship model and introducing fee based models. The
pilot will continue throughout FY16 and is expected to cover many more topics that benefit from thinking
across Centers.
CLEAR Meeting, Bonn
18
• Prioritize activities in specific countries or with specific
partners according to likelihood of success.
• Examine what support would be needed to improve
performance, within the regional or country context and
institutional reality.
• Identify approaches ready for sharing with the CLEAR
community and other suppliers of evaluation capacity
development services. (See Box 2, pages 20–21 provides
a summary of this pilot)
Global Forum
CLEAR provides a unique opportunity for the centers to
collaborate and exchange tacit knowledge and experiences,
promote regional networks, and participate in or organize
events where practitioners from different countries can
meet and share lessons in M&E. In FY15 CLEAR held an
internal CLEAR Centers’ meeting in April 2015 in Bonn, rather
than a regular CLEAR Global forum, to allow for stock taking
and to discuss the program-wide knowledge and learning
approaches, to learn from each other’s strategies, as well
as discuss CLEAR’s contribution to the year of evaluation in
2015. The global fora will resume in FY16.
Network Support
iCLEAR
CLEAR’s Global Hub Team established a new collaboration
space on the World Bank’s Collaboration for Development
(C4D) platform, allowing CLEAR members to share
knowledge and information. As of June 30, 2015, 55 staff
members had signed on, and more than 30 discussions have
taken place. The C4D has also become a repository where
120 CLEAR materials and program-wide documents have
been uploaded and exchanged. The C4D is also serving as
the platform for the wikis.
CLEAR Website
The CLEAR program website was maintained and updated
throughout FY15, offering visitors convenient and direct
access to important documents and individual center
websites. In FY15, 75% of website visitors came to the site
for the first time; 25% of overall website visits were from
repeat users. The number of pages viewed totalled more
than 15,500. The top five countries of origin for website
visitors were the United States (24.4%), India (9.7%), South
Africa (4.3%), the United Kingdom (4.0%) and Kenya (3.6%).
CLEAR’s website was established in 2011 and an update
was needed. A new design concept was developed, and the
updated website is expected to be functional in early FY16.
CLEAR at the Year of Evaluation
The Year of Evaluation provided a unique platform for CLEAR
members to disseminate information about the initiative,
promote CLEAR’s work, facilitate dialogue on evaluation, and
connect with key experts, constituents, and stakeholders. In
the first half of the Year, Centers organized and participated
in a variety of regional and global events. For instance,
a CLEAR Board member promoted CLEAR’s approach to
evaluation capacity in a presentation at the UK Evaluation
Society’s May 2015 conference. The American Evaluation
Association celebrated CLEAR week with contributions to
the aea365 blog from several members of CLEAR, and CLEAR
Latin America brought the Evaluation Torch to Mexico in
March 2015 . Additional events are planned, and CLEAR will
have a global presence with all Centers at the upcoming
National Evaluation Capacities conference in Bangkok,
Thailand, in October 2015.
CLEAR Meeting, Bonn CLEAR Meeting, Bonn
19
M&E Training in the Pacific Region
Building on its FY14 activities, CLEAR continued its
commitment to serve the needs of Pacific Islanders through
the Pacific Islands Center for Public Administration at the
University of the South Pacific. With the support of the
Administration, Australia’s High Commission in Tonga and
Tonga’s Public Service Commission, CLEAR provided M&E
training to officials of several Tongan ministries and agencies,
including the Ministries of Finance, Heath, Education,
Justice, Infrastructure, and Tonga Customs, the Tonga Audit
Office, the Prime Minister’s Office, and the Public Service
Commission.
Appendix 2 provides further specifics on the program-level
work accomplished under the global component.
Governance and Management
CLEAR’s mid-term review concluded in October 2014 and
provided an opportunity to reflect on the program and
make key management decisions to enable the program
to further improve its reach and impact. Two meetings, one
in Dublin in September 2014 and the next in Bonn in April
2015, helped formalize the decisions and take steps in their
implementation.
A key decision was to transform CLEAR’s governance to
make it more effective, transparent, and inclusive, given
that several CLEAR Centers have been selected and are
participating actively in the program.
Key changes introduced were:
• Establishing the CLEAR Council, which includes
representatives of all CLEAR groups—the global funders,
the Centers, and the Global Hub Team. The CLEAR Council
is now the key strategy setting body for the Program.
• Creating a new Funding Committee, comprising global
donors to the program, to determine the financial size of
the program and ensure adequate funding.
• Giving the Council’s Chair a stronger mandate and role in
strategic and operational oversight and designating the
position also as CLEAR’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The
CEO is to be supported in decision-making by an executive
sub-committee comprising a Center representative from
the Council and a member of the Funding Committee.
Budget
Through FY15, the program had committed or spent $10.29
million or approximately 50% of the $19.35 million budget
projected through FY21. Eighty-seven percent of the
commitments and expenditures were for regional learning
(including grants to the Centers), six percent for global
knowledge, and the remaining six percent for governance,
management and administration. In addition, the World
Bank Group used its administrative budget and staff time to
support CLEAR. Appendix 3 provides further information.
Of the total projected budget through FY21, 77% of the
CLEAR Trust Fund budget is allocated for regional learning
and 12% for global knowledge. The remaining 10% is to be
used for program governance and management, including
monitoring and reporting and trust fund administration.
Anglophone/Francophone Africa South Asia
20
BOX 2: Learning from Performance (LeaP)
In 2015, as a core part of its knowledge and learning approach,
CLEAR instituted the LeaP review to assess performance surface
learning, and drive innovation.
Learning from Performance for Phase II
LEAP reviews in four Centers yielded key lessons:
• Defining business lines with intermediate outcomes helps align with the theory of change and the two main
outcomes of the CLEAR Centers’ work. The LEAP process requires centers to cluster activities in a meaningful way
and related to the intended outcomes for specific audiences. This resulting work on defining individual business
lines greatly supported orienting all strategic discussions along the theory of change, toward specific intermediate
outcomes, while also creating materials that the Centers can now use when crafting their local theories of change.
• High demand can be a threat to work programming and use of resources, unless addressed strategically. Demand
comes to the CLEAR Centers from many stakeholders, including countries, and a systematic approach to identifying
priorities is needed to enable the Centers to determine how best to deploy their resources. Developing explicit
rankings of countries/institutions on their “likelihood of success” could lead to more transparent priority setting.
• A variety of business models for delivery are being deployed by the Centers, and these will need to be assessed for
their effectiveness. Given that CLEAR Centers had few permanent staff when selected, all four Centers that did LeaP
reviews have developed distinct business models for delivery. In India and Mexico, the CLEAR team draws heavily
on staff (India) and graduate students (Mexico) of their respective host organizations to enhance their capacity to
deliver a wide range of services. For their “across region” work, in-country partner organizations are mobilized and
operate with limited involvement from the CLEAR Center, although at different levels.The Center in South Africa will
probably need to go beyond its host organization and mobilize delivery partners across South Africa. The CLEAR
Center in Senegal, faced with a limited supply of training-oriented lecturers within its host organization, has instead
invested in building up a solid pool of well-trained trainers for the delivery of awareness raising and skills development.
• Focusing on training seems a legitimate choice in certain circumstances to build business and induce longer-term
changes. The LeaP review discussed what might be considered an “over reliance” on training as a delivery model.
However, selecting relevant participants and training of trainers, on which to build a strategy of more in-depth
and long-term engagement with the participants, should be possible. Training complemented with community of
practice work and other tools to encourage sustained participant engagement appear very reasonable.
A performance audit: It does not
impact grant disbursement or extension
An evaluation: This is not a traditional
evaluation that is independent or an
objective assessment of work done
A reporting tool: Will not be used for
formally reporting on progress made
or performance
A planning tool: Helps identify
priorities—where to use limited resources
for maximum impact
A strategy tool: Helps identify
management strategies and approaches
to improve performance
A learning tool: Helps identify what has
worked and what hasn’t in delivering
CLEAR services and sharing knowledge
What is LeaP?
...it is ...it is not
21
1 (low) 2 3 4 5 (high)
THE RIGHT CLIENT
Are we working with
strategically selected clients?
Strategic implies that the
selection process is deliberate,
there are pre-determined
selection criteria, and there is
high likelihood that selected
client will contribute to
objectives of the business line.
CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS
OUTCOME: SELF ASSESSMENT
 Less than 20% clients
are strategically
selected There is no
pre-determined criteria
used to select clients
 Most clients are
decided according to
convenience,
availability or obligatory
requirements
 Low likelihood that
working with these
clients’ will lead to
realization of business
line objectives
Between 21 and 40% clients are
strategically selected
 There is some implicit predetermined
criteria used to
select clients, though it may
not be precise or detailed, or
used consistently
 There is some likelihood that
working with these clients
will achieve business line
objectives
Between 41 and 60% clients are
strategically selected
 Center has implicit or explicit,
pre-determined criteria used
to select clients, but this is only
used around half the time
 There is some likelihood that
working with these clients will
achieve business line
objectives
Between 61 and 80% clients are
strategically selected
 Center has explicit and
detailed criteria used to
select clients
 There is high likelihood that
working with these clients
will achieve business line
objectives
More than 80% of the clients are
strategically selected
 Almost all clients are elected
deliberately, after careful analysis
using explicitly spelled out
selection criteria
 Criteria updated regularly to
reflect any strategy changes
 There is very high likelihood that
working with these clients is
leading to realization business line
objectives
THE RIGHT SERVICE
Are we delivering high quality
services?
High quality implies
appropriate format, design,
delivery, and content of service
for the pre-determined
objectives. This can be achieved
through a formal quality
assurance process/mechanism.
Less than 20% of activities are
high quality
 No quality assurance
tool is used to ensure
high quality service
 The design, pace,
sequencing of activities
is not suitable to client
needs, the pedagogy is
not engaging
 Knowledge/content
shared is out of date
Between 21 and 40% of activities
are high quality
 There is an informal quality
assurance mechanism in
place
 Design, pace and sequencing
of activities is somewhat
suitable to client needs but
needs a lot of modification,
the pedagogy is sometimes
engaging
 Knowledge/content
presented is only partially up
to date
Between 41 and 60% of activities are
high quality
 There is an explicit quality
assurance mechanism that is
used for around half the
activities
 Design, pace and sequencing
of activities is suitable to client
needs but some modification,
the pedagogy is usually
engaging
 The knowledge shared is up to
do date half the time
Between 61 and 80% of activities
are high quality
 There is an explicit quality
assurance mechanism that is
used for most activities
 Design, pace and sequencing
of activities is mostly suitable
to client needs, the
pedagogy is mostly engaging
 The knowledge shared is
state of the art most of the
time
More than 80% of activities are high
quality
 There is an explicit quality
assurance mechanism that has to
be used for almost all activities
 Design, pace and sequencing of
activities is logically, consistent
with local needs, and easy to
understand, pedagogy is almost
always engaging
 Knowledge presented is always
state of the art
THE RIGHT ENVIRONMENT
Are we taking advantage of or
creating a conducive actionenvironment?
A conducive actionenvironment
brings onboard
the right people at the right
time, and provides pre- and
post-service support. This is
only possible if center is well
aware about the action
environment (political,
institutional, organization
constraints and opportunities)
that the client operates in.
Less than 20% of activities take
advantage of/create conducive
action environment
 The center does not
take into consideration
client’s action
environment
 The right stakeholders
are not involved to get
buy-in for activity
 The delivery of the
service is NOT
strategically
timed/placed to
encourage the
application of learning
 There is little or no
follow-up after activity
Between 21 and 40% of activities
take advantage of/create conducive
action environment
 The center is somewhat
aware of client’s action
environment
 Some of the right
stakeholders are involved to
get buy-in for activity
 Few activities are
timed/placed to encourage
the application of learning
 There is little follow-up after
activity
Between 41 and 60% of activities take
advantage of/create conducive action
environment
 The center is aware of client’s
action environment around
half the time
 Some of the right stakeholders
are involved to get buy-in for
activity
 Some activities are
timed/placed to encourage
the application of learning
 There is some follow-up after
activity to enhance learning
Between 61 and 80% of activities
take advantage of/create conducive
action environment
 The center is aware of
client’s action environment
most of the time
 Most of the right
stakeholders are involved to
get buy-in for activity
 The activity is well
timed/placed to encourage
the application of learning
 There is adequate follow-up
after activity to enhance
learning
More than 80% of activities take
advantage of/create conducive action
environment
 The center is aware of client’s
action environment almost all of
the time
 All the right stakeholders are
involved in the activity
 Activities are delivered after
careful examination of the timing
such that client is able to
implement learning
 An after-service support plan is in
place and implemented such that
clients engage with content on a
continued basis
22
A. Anglophone Africa
Number of
Grants Grant Period* Grant Amount
(in USD)
Planned Expenditure**
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Disbursement***
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Cumulative
Disbursement
to Jun. 30, 2015
Grant # 1 12/12/2011 - 05/31/2013 886,013 0 0 886,013
Grant # 2 06/12/14 - 01/15/2017 2,997,325 998,202 754,478 754,478
* From grant agreement date to grant closing date
** From Center’s plan
*** From unaudited Trust Funds Financial Reports, June 30, 2015, World Bank Group
Financial Report
Activities, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015
APPENDIX 1 Financial Reports, Activities and Client Ratings
4.5
4.55
4.32
1 2 3 4 5
Applicability of Services
Relevance of Services
Quality of Services
Low quality High quality
Client Ratings for Services
+ From Center’s dashboard (completed activities)
++ Female participation for one activity with 103 participants unknown
23
B. South Asia
Financial Report
Activities, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015
Number of
Grants Grant Period* Grant Amount
(in USD)
Planned Expenditure**
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Disbursement***
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Cumulative
Disbursement
to Jun. 30, 2015
Grant # 1 09/12/2011 - 10/01/2012 612,924 0 0 612,924
Grant # 2 07/03/2013 - 07/01/2015 1,300,000 561,692 478,435 1,007,929
* From grant agreement date to grant closing date
** From Center’s plan
*** From unaudited Trust Funds Financial Reports, June 30, 2015, World Bank Group
3.94
3.9
3.83
1 2 3 4 5
Applicability of Services
Relevance of Services
Quality of Services
Low quality High quality
Client Ratings for Services
+ From Center’s dashboard (completed activities)
60
24
C. East Asia
Financial Report
Activities, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015
Number of
Grants Grant Period* Grant Amount
(in USD)
Planned Expenditure**
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Disbursement***
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Cumulative
Disbursement
to Jun. 30, 2015
Grant # 1 11/15/2012 - 12/31/2014 350,000 200,839 90,083 350,000
* From grant agreement date to grant closing date
** From Center’s plan
*** From unaudited Trust Funds Financial Reports, June 30, 2015, World Bank Group
4.41
4.29
4.17
1 2 3 4 5
Applicability of Services
Relevance of Services
Quality of Services
Low quality High quality
Client Ratings for Services
11
China (11)
+ From Center’s dashboard (completed activities)
25
D. Francophone Africa
Financial Report
Activities, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015
Number of
Grants Grant Period* Grant Amount
(in USD)
Planned Expenditure**
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Disbursement***
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Cumulative
Disbursement
to Jun. 30, 2015
Grant # 1 11/5/2012 - 11/30/2 268,970 105,151 20,548 103,771
Grant (IDF) 11/10/2012 - 11/10/2015 995,750 479,295 165,647 446,809
* From grant agreement date to grant closing date
** From Center’s plan
*** From unaudited Trust Funds Financial Reports, June 30, 2015, World Bank Group
Other Revenue: $10,400
4.51
4.62
4.46
1 2 3 4 5
Applicability of Services
Relevance of Services
Quality of Services
Low quality High quality
Client Ratings for Services
+ From Center’s dashboard (completed activities)
Unspecified (1)
26
E. Latin America
Financial Report
Activities, July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015
Number of
Grants Grant Period* Grant Amount
(in USD)
Planned Expenditure**
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Disbursement***
Jul. 1, 2014
to Jun. 30, 2015
Cumulative
Disbursement
to Jun. 30, 2015
Grant # 1 06/12/2013 - 12/31/2015 695,000 476,200 186,308 236,527
* From grant agreement date to grant closing date
** From Center’s plan
*** From unaudited Trust Funds Financial Reports, June 30, 2015, World Bank Group
Other Revenue: $1,427,671
2
6
1
22
4.38
4.35
4.19
1 2 3 4 5
Applicability of Services
Relevance of Services
Quality of Services
Low quality High quality
Client Ratings for Services
+ From Center’s dashboard (completed activities)

28
APPENDIX 2: CLEAR’s Outcomes and Outputs
[Based on updated theory of change as of April 24, 2015; indicators currently under revision, and baselines and targets to be
established]
Results (Outcomes) Key Performance Indicators*
Highest-Level Outcomes to which CLEAR Contributes
- Monitoring and evaluation information is increasingly used to
make policy and program decisions
By 2018, 70 percent of strategic clients and stakeholders
surveyed report increased use of evidence in decision making
Higher-Level Outcomes to which CLEAR Contributes
- M&E systems are strengthened
By 2018, an external evaluation indicates that centers have
contributed to strengthening of M&E systems
CLEAR’S Outcomes
- Strategic clients gain awareness of, knowledge in, and the
motivation to use M&E approaches, methods, tools, and
findings
- Actual and potential M&E capacity providers gain awareness of,
knowledge in, and the motivation to use CLEAR’s services and
knowledge regarding “how to” and “what works” in developing
capacity
Percentage of Clients who rate 4 or 5 on a tracer survey for the
following questions: “useful for overall work” and “are engaged in
a related network”
Qualitative feedback based on tracer surveys
Centers are financially and institutionally viable Increase in Centers’ sources of funds or endowment relative to
the CLEAR grant [Baseline determined by Centers]
Results (Outputs) Key Performance Indicators
REGIONAL LEARNING
Centers produce and deliver relevant and high quality
knowledge services and products to:
- Strategic clients
- Other actual and potential ECD providers
85 percent of clients/ECD providers rate 4 or 5 (on a five-point
scale, 1=low and 5= high) on “Quality” and “Usefulness” of the
Center’s business line
Number and size of networks created for knowledge and
learning
GLOBAL APPROACH
CLEAR Global Knowledge Hub and iCLEAR aggregate CLEAR’s
knowledge and host a vibrant community of practice for the
Centers
Increase in number of knowledge products shared through website
and selected collaboration platform
Number of downloads
Qualitative assessment of the knowledge hub and community of
practice
* Targets to be established.
29
APPENDIX 3: Overview of Program-Level Tasks and Deliverables
Key Tasks,
Milestones, and
Deliverables
Period/
Completion
Date
Deliverables/Targets Status (cumulative) Status
(July 2014-June 2015)
REGIONAL APPROACH
Centers Selected 2010–14 Background studies and
consultations with regional
experts
Demand assessment studies
Development of selection criteria
Four Centers selected by 2012
Six Centers selected by
December 2013
Brazil center proposal and grant
preparation
Centers
Operational
2011–18 Annual work plans, strategy
updates
Reports produced 2012,
2013, 2014
Annual report, 2015
Strategies updated based on
the Mid-Term Evaluation CLEAR
Leadership Retreat in Dublin,
CLEAR Meeting in Bonn and
LEAP reviews (see below)
GLOBAL LEARNING
Global Knowledge
and Learning
2011–18 One international knowledge
product/capacity building
approach developed,
per year
- Developed and/or
delivered
- Impact
evaluation
- Performance-based
budgeting
- M&E fundamentals (2)
2011–18 Global program mentoring
for implementing knowledge/
capacity approaches, on demand
and based on centers’ work
programs
Mentoring and facilitation
with experts provided to
all centers
LEAP (Learning from
Performance) reviews
established as the core learning
approach. LEAP reviews piloted
in South Asia, Latin America,
Anglophone Africa, and
Francophone Africa
Global Forum/
Wikis
2011–18 Annual global forum once per
year, designed in collaboration
with the sponsoring center.
2011/Paris
2012/Accra
2013/Tunis
2013/Mexico
2014/Dublin
CLEAR meeting held in Bonn,
Germany (2014), to finalize key
Mid-Term Evaluation actions;
WIKIs piloted and are being
taken forward
Network Support 2011–18 Quality assurance guidelines, by
end 2013
Operations manual, by end 2014
Network development
activities—ongoing
Website, dissemination, and
communications—ongoing
Taskforces on governance
(report)
Knowledge-sharing
through website design
(report)
Website—ongoing
Quality assurance
framework completed.
Implementing Capacity
Building Programs
Operations manual
(updates ongoing)
Website (ongoing)
New website commisioned
Table 3.A: Program-Level Tasks and Deliverables
30
GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT
Board Meetings
Secretariat Work
program
Evaluation
2010–18
2010–18
2010–18
Twice/year
Annual
Midterm by 2013 and final by
2018
Ongoing
Ongoing
Five Board meetings; New
governance instituted on
April 24, 2015 (see Table1
below)
Independent Mid-Term
Evaluation. Finalized in
October 2014
MTE actions
6 implemented, 6 on track.
Table 3.B: CLEAR Board/ Governance Meetings (July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015)
Date Name Agenda
July 8-9, 2014 CLEAR Board Meeting • MTE Findings
• CLEAR Phase II
September 28-30, 2015 CLEAR Leadership retreat
(Dublin)
• Build common vision, theory of change and strategy
• Define success clearly, including success indicators
• Update governance in alignment with new Phase II directions
October 23, 2014 CLEAR Board • Management Response to the CLEAR Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) report
• Proposed Phase II charter and governance structure
• Vision, Mission, and Proposed Theory of Change and Indicators
• FY14 Global Work Program and Budget and Budget Projections
November 18, 2014 CLEAR Board • Revised program charter/governance for finalization
• Initial ideas on the first council meeting
• Business processes for governance
• Date and agenda of the next Board meeting
January 7, 2015 CLEAR Board • Discussion of and feedback on the draft approach to building a fundraising
strategy in the context of the current budget projections
• Update on the work accomplished post Mid-Term Evaluation and the Dublin
retreat
• Other business (Change of AA Director, revision of Charter, Council
meeting, next meeting)
March 6, 2015 CLEAR Leadership Retreat • Updates (Collaboration space, introduction of Clear Director)
• Discussion of the proposed Theory of Change and narrative
• Updated fund-raising strategy
• CLEAR’s participation in Year of Evaluation
• Administrative Agreement Extension to 2021
April 21-24, 2015 CLEAR Council Meeting
(Bonn)
• Summary of the CLEAR management meeting held prior to the Council
meeting
• Reflect on what it means to be a CLEAR Council and a member of the Council
(ratifying the CLEAR Charter; agreeing on the Council Protocol)
• Agree on the Council Executive Sub-Committee
• Agree on the CLEAR Global Theory of Change and Key Indicators
• Determine CLEAR Council Annual Plan
July 1, 2015 Executive Committee
Meeting (virtual)
• Review of Key performance indicators and decide on adopting these
• Planning of the Global Forum 2015
• CLEAR contribution to the Year of Evaluation and discussion of the
proposal to hold a panel at the NEC conference
31
APPENDIX 4: Contributions to the Program and Expenditures and Projections
Table 4.A: Contributions to CLEAR, by Funding Agency (As of June 30, 2015—unaudited statements)
Funding Agency Receipts and Commitments
Asian Development Bank $ 450,000.00
African Development Bank $100,000
Australian Government - Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade $1,135,410
Belgium $147,411
Department for International Development—UK $4,665,745
Inter-American Development Bank $1,200,000
Rockefeller Foundation $2,500,000
Swiss Agency for Cooperation and Development $327,879
Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency $4,689,949
Investment Income (Cumulative as of 14 October 2014) $125,324
World Bank Institutional Development Fund (IDF)/Direct Cash to Center $995,790
IEG World Bank Cash Contribution (est.)* $72,000
Total (including World Bank funds) $16,409,508
Total Donor Funds (non-World Bank) $15,341,718
Non-WB Donor Funds Paid (as of January 2015) $14,598,352
* In addition, the World Bank/IEG contributes approximately $400,000/year, covering staff cost and other expenditures.
Table 4.B: CLEAR Expenditures and Projections, by Fiscal Year and Component (As of June 30,
2015—unaudited statements)
Components Total Planned
FY10–21
Expenditures and
Commitments
FY10–15
Projected
FY161
Projected
FY17
Projected
FY18
Projected
FY19–212
Regional: Grants
(Expenditures by Center +
Commitments)
$13,681,024 $8,106,024 $2,925,000 $1,600,000 $1,050,000 —
Regional: Direct Support, Demand
Assessment, Selection $1,245,985 $890,985 $130,000 $100,000 $125,000 —
Global Knowledge and Learning $2,361,972 $626,972 $420,000 $420,000 $415,000 $480,000
Governance and Management $1,191,445 $221,945 $134,000 $134,000 $434,000 $267,500
Administration Fee $869,241 $449,241 $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 $210,000
Total $19,349,667 $10,295,167 $3,679,000 $2,324,000 $2,094,000 $957,500
Note: Includes the Multi-Donor Trust Fund and Institutional Development Fund.
1 All expenditures stated are unaudited. Audited statement will be provided by the World Bank Group to donors.
2 The extension to 2021 is to be finalized with the funding agencies.
32
Figure 4.A: Expenditures and Commitments Through FY15, by Center (%)
45123116428
Anglophone Africa
46.3%
South Asia
23.4%
Francophone Africa
16.0%
East Asia
4.8%
Pacific
0.8%
Latin America:
Spanish Speaking
8.4%
Figure 4.B: Summary Projections Through FY21, by Center (%)
3623+1196384
Anglophone Africa
37.5%
South Asia
24.5%
Francophone Africa
19.9%
East Asia
4.2%
Pacific
2.8%
Latin America:
Spanish Speaking
7.7%
Latin America:
Lusophone (Brazil)
3.2%
TOTAL=$9 MILLION
TOTAL= $14.3 MILLION
Latin America:
Lusophone (Brazil)
0.1%
Multiregion
0.2%
Multiregion
0.1%
33
As of April 24, 2015, the governance structure of CLEAR
comprises two main governance bodies:
• The CLEAR Council
• The Funding Committee.
The operations of the CLEAR Council and the Funding Committee
are supported by the Global Hub Team, housed at IEG.
CLEAR Council
The CLEAR Council includes representatives of all CLEAR
groups and comprises:
a. All Funding Committee Members
b. Center Directors
c. Team Leader of the Global Hub Team
The Council sets the overall strategy and goals for the Program
and assesses its performance. It also provides advice
to and seeks decisions from the Funding Committee regarding
key aspects of the Program. The Council is chaired by
the Program Chief Executive Officer. Decisions are reached
by consensus. The scope of work for the council includes:
• Strategy: Provide strategic direction to the Program
Performance and Accountability: Provide advice to the
Funding Committee, the Centers, and the Global Hub
based on portfolio and performance reviews.
• Governance: Undertake activities that strengthen program
governance and management.
The Executive Sub-Committee appointed by the Council.
The CLEAR Council has also selected two members, representing
the CLEAR Centers and the global funders respectively,
to form an Executive Sub-Committee; the CLEAR CEO is the
third member of the Executive Sub-Committee. The Council
delegates decision making on implementation to the Executive
Sub-Committee so that the Sub-Committee drives strategy
implementation by making key operational decisions as
needed. The Sub-Committee meets quarterly (virtually) or on
an as-needed basis, as determined by the CEO. Decisions are
made by consensus.
Funding Committee
The Funding Committee comprises funders to the Multi-Donor
Trust Fund established at the World Bank to finance CLEAR,
based on the following membership rules:
a. Full membership is reserved for funders contributing
an average of $300,000 or more per year.
b. One funder collectively representing the global
funders contributing less than the requisite amount of
cash (IEG will nominate and invite the representative
on the basis absence of funders’ objection).
c. Senior manager from IEG.
The scope of activities for the committee includes:
• Funding strategy: Determining the financial size of the
Program
• Funding and Accountability: Ensuring adequate funding
for operations and Program accountability and oversight.
• Governance: Reviewing, and concurring with, Councilproposed
changes to the Charter, subject to the terms
of the Administration Agreements and Bank policies
and procedures
APPENDIX 5 Governance and Management
34
Members from Funding Agencies
Monika Weber-Fahr
IEG, World Bank Group (Chair)
Rakesh Nangia
African Development Bank
Vinod Thomas
Asian Development Bank
Louisa Dow
Australian Government—Department of Foreign Affairs
and Trade
Jacqueline Lienard
Belgian Development Cooperation Agency
Cheryl Gray
Inter-American Development Bank
Nancy MacPherson
Rockefeller Foundation
Lennart Peck
Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency
Anne Bichsel
Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
Penny Hawkins
UK Department for International Development
CLEAR Centers—Leadership and Key Staff
Anglophone Africa
Laila Smith
Tim Clynick
Kieron Crawley
Neissan Besharati
Bahihah Mohamed
Charles Amoatey (Ghana)
James Obuya Bagaka (Kenya)
Francophone Africa
Boubacar Aw
Amos Menard
Mady Koanda (Burkina Faso)
East Asia
Kouqing Li
Runzhong Peng
Min Zhao
Ningqin Wu
Baolian Chen
South Asia
John Floretta
Urmy Shukla
Priyajeet Arora
Arqam Lodhi (Pakistan)
Latin America, Spanish-speaking
Claudia Maldonado
Cristina Galindez
Brazil and Lusophone Africa
Andre Portela Souza
Lycia Lima
Dalila Figueiredo
CLEAR Global Hub
Nidhi Khattri, Head
Maurya West Meiers
Ximena Fernandez Ordonez
Naoko Hosaka
Neha Sharma
Robin Van Kippersluis
Junya Yuan
For more information, visit
www.theclearinitiative.org
CLEAR Logo for Centers
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
SOUTH ASIA
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
EAST ASIA
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
ANGLOPHONE AFRICA
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
FRANCOPHONE AFRICA
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
BRAZIL & LUSOPHONE AFRICA
Centers for Learning on Evaluation and Results
LATIN AMERICA
37
CLEAR Funding Agencies
Date
Topic Tag
Regional Center Tag
Resource Type Tag
Language Type Tag
Image Thumb
ar15