职权范围-芬兰发展合作评价的见解

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.31244/zfe.2023.01.03
S. Väth, Maja Flaig, Hansjörg Gaus
{"title":"职权范围-芬兰发展合作评价的见解","authors":"S. Väth, Maja Flaig, Hansjörg Gaus","doi":"10.31244/zfe.2023.01.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"High-quality terms of reference (ToRs) point to solid evaluation objectives, precise evaluation questions, appropriately capturing of OECD/DAC criteria and specific methodological requirements. They guide evaluators by facilitating focussed evaluations, thus, more tailored data collection and analysis, which in turn is expected to uplift the quality of evaluation reports. Based on a meta-evaluation commissioned by Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, we assess the impact of ToRs on the quality of evaluation reports. For a sample of 70 mid-term and final evaluations of development interventions, we run different ordinary least square regressions with robust standard errors. We find that a one-unit increase of quality of ToRs (on a scale from 1 to 4) is statistically significantly associated to a third of a unit increase of quality of evaluation reports (on a scale from 1 to 4). Therefore, we conclude: it is plausible that ToRs matter.","PeriodicalId":41629,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Terms of Reference Matter – Insights from Evaluations of Finnish Development Cooperation\",\"authors\":\"S. Väth, Maja Flaig, Hansjörg Gaus\",\"doi\":\"10.31244/zfe.2023.01.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"High-quality terms of reference (ToRs) point to solid evaluation objectives, precise evaluation questions, appropriately capturing of OECD/DAC criteria and specific methodological requirements. They guide evaluators by facilitating focussed evaluations, thus, more tailored data collection and analysis, which in turn is expected to uplift the quality of evaluation reports. Based on a meta-evaluation commissioned by Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, we assess the impact of ToRs on the quality of evaluation reports. For a sample of 70 mid-term and final evaluations of development interventions, we run different ordinary least square regressions with robust standard errors. We find that a one-unit increase of quality of ToRs (on a scale from 1 to 4) is statistically significantly associated to a third of a unit increase of quality of evaluation reports (on a scale from 1 to 4). Therefore, we conclude: it is plausible that ToRs matter.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31244/zfe.2023.01.03\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31244/zfe.2023.01.03","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高质量的职权范围指的是可靠的评价目标、精确的评价问题、适当地把握经合发组织/发展援助委员会的标准和具体的方法要求。它们通过促进有重点的评价来指导评价人员,因此,更有针对性的数据收集和分析,这反过来又有望提高评价报告的质量。基于芬兰外交部委托进行的一项元评估,我们评估了托尔对评估报告质量的影响。对于70个发展干预措施的中期和最终评估样本,我们运行了不同的具有稳健标准误差的普通最小二乘回归。我们发现,tor的质量每增加一个单位(从1到4),与评估报告质量每增加三分之一单位(从1到4)在统计上显著相关。因此,我们得出结论:tor很重要似乎是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Terms of Reference Matter – Insights from Evaluations of Finnish Development Cooperation
High-quality terms of reference (ToRs) point to solid evaluation objectives, precise evaluation questions, appropriately capturing of OECD/DAC criteria and specific methodological requirements. They guide evaluators by facilitating focussed evaluations, thus, more tailored data collection and analysis, which in turn is expected to uplift the quality of evaluation reports. Based on a meta-evaluation commissioned by Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, we assess the impact of ToRs on the quality of evaluation reports. For a sample of 70 mid-term and final evaluations of development interventions, we run different ordinary least square regressions with robust standard errors. We find that a one-unit increase of quality of ToRs (on a scale from 1 to 4) is statistically significantly associated to a third of a unit increase of quality of evaluation reports (on a scale from 1 to 4). Therefore, we conclude: it is plausible that ToRs matter.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation
Zeitschrift Fur Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
33.30%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Die Kompetenzstelle der Bundesregierung für Evaluierung im Statistischen Bundesamt Meta-Evaluierungen von Projektevaluierungen in der Praxis: Erfahrungen aus der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Terms of Reference Matter – Insights from Evaluations of Finnish Development Cooperation Machtwissen? Evaluation zwischen Evidenz und (Mikro-)Politik. Persönliche Eindrücke zur Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Evaluation e.V. (DeGEval), 14.–16. September 2022 Hybride Lehre an Universitäten – eine Evaluation hybrider Seminare am Beispiel des Kompetenzzentrums Weiterbildung Allgemeinmedizin Saarland
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1