The Independent External Evaluation IEE of FAO A

The Independent External Evaluation (IEE) of FAO A Case Study

Methodology of the Case Study Triangulation from a mix of: • Study of the very extensive documentation • Review against evaluation quality criteria • Questionnaire perception survey to all permanent missions to FAO and to senior management and country representatives • Interviews with key informants for the evaluation planning, conduct and follow-up

Genesis of the FAO-IEE Grew out of crisis of confidence by some developed countries, & • Desire by some of those countries for an IEE they could dominate & which would influence the election of the DG • Through an open, consultative & professional process in the governing bodies, grew into a fully comprehensive and independent evaluation that the great majority of FAO members could support • Was not welcomed by management, but was not frustrated either

To. Rs & Selection of Evaluation Team The confidence of members and management in the IEE was enhanced by: • Neutral and comprehensive terms of reference which met evaluation standards and were largely prepared by independent evaluation specialists • Selection of a technically qualified evaluation team through a transparent process which was geographically and gender balanced • Independent quality assurance

Quality of Evaluation Process & Report The confidence of members and management in the IEE was enhanced by: • Reporting on progress of the evaluation to an inter-governmental forum whose To. R excluded it from influencing evaluation enquiry and findings • Quality and comprehensiveness of evaluation process • Quality of the report

Building in Follow-up From its inception IEE was expected to lead to concrete follow-up: • To. Rs called for action recommendations • Follow-up mechanism in governing bodies was put in place before finalisation of IEE • Institutionalised governing body followup

IEE resulted in substantial follow-up Follow-up judged to be largely beneficial: • FAO received a budget increase immediately following IEE • Governing Bodies agreed detailed immediate action plan approved at Conference Special Session one year later (Nov 2008) • Action plan has been monitored and implemented – general satisfaction with progress • With a new DG, the IEE has ceased to be the major driver of change • IEE provided value for money

Lessons from FAO IEE The IEE responded to a unique set of circumstances but some general lessons can be suggested: • IEEs can be valuable for regaining confidence and instigating reform in well established institutions • A strong formative element is important for costeffective IEEs • IEEs must address governance as well as programme & management issues • Actionable recommendations facilitate follow-up

Lessons from FAO IEE - continued • High priority is needed to an institutionalised follow-up process, including governing bodies • IEEs have a limited shelf-life & can usefully be periodic on an institutionalised cycle, perhaps related as much to the appointment period of executive heads as budget cycles • External leadership of IEEs, even if commissioned by well- regarded evaluation offices, adds to confidence in their findings and probably to impartiality

Thank you