Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here . As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org .

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here . As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org .

By Oyundalai Odkhuu Mongolian Evaluation Association & Cognos International LLC The Mongolian Evaluation Association (MEA) was founded in 2021 to promote professional evaluation in Mongolia. The MEA is a registered, non-profit, non-political organization dedicated to professional evaluation and has been a member of the International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation (IOCE) since 2022. Since its inception, MEA has been encouraging young people to get involved in evaluation through various activities. In this regard, we initiated the Young and Emerging Evaluators (YEE) internship programme with EvalYouth Mongolia and Youth Inc. under the initiative of the Youth in Evaluation week, which was launched in 2023. Mongolia is a country of young people, and youth aged 15–34 represent the largest demographic group in the country, constituting nearly 35  per cent of the population in 2019. However, youth engagement in evaluation is underrepresented, including in the design and delivery of programmes, strategies, policies, funding mechanisms, and in organizations at the national level. There is also a lack of understanding of youth’s voice and power in evaluation. The meaningful engagement of youth in evaluation is a term that encompasses a range of understandings, experiences, and techniques. According to the Global Consensus Statement on Meaningful Adolescent and Youth Engagement (2018), meaningful adolescent and youth engagement is a respectful partnership between youth and adults, where power is shared, and young people's ideas and skills are integrated into programmes and policies that affect their lives and communities. This blog focuses on how MEA has been supporting meaningful engagement of youth in evaluation in Mongolia through several activities such as advocacy, evaluation case competitions, advocacy to sign the Youth in Evaluation manifesto, and even capacity building of youth in evaluation. The Youth in Evaluation week has provided us with an invaluable opportunity to delve into the untapped potential of young people in evaluation. First, we advocated with the younger generation on the value and impact of evaluation, and its importance, inspiring them to consider careers in this field. So what does this mean in the context of advocacy for youth in evaluation? Youth advocacy involves making sure that young people's perspectives, needs, and interests are actively included and represented in evaluations. In this regard, we organized a 5-day Living Library session where over 200 students were provided a basic understanding of evaluation and who in turn expressed their observations and needs to teachers and specialists in evaluation. This campaign resonated with the students because it offered a unique pathway for young people to connect with global leaders and experts in their field. Youth advocacy involves making sure that young people's perspectives, needs, and interests are actively included and represented in evaluations. Second, the first Mongolian Evaluation Case Competition was organized and promoted across five major universities in Mongolia so that students learn more about programme evaluation and teamwork, and get inspired to pursue careers as evaluation professionals. We successfully engaged 200 students in this initiative, thanks to the support from Ernst & Young Mongolia. Moreover, we also conducted the summer evaluation boot camp, offering students invaluable hands-on experience in the field of evaluation, in partnership with American University. Third, we organized a 3-day online training on evaluation for YEEs in Mongolia, to strengthen their capacities in evaluation. The training provided participants with in-depth knowledge on various evaluation topics in partnership with American University. The capacity development training was conducted as part of a MOU between the MEA and American University. As this training was unique for YEEs, they actively engaged and asked questions related to the importance of evaluation in policy-making and the best experiences so far. Over 30 participants attended this training and gained essential knowledge and understanding of evaluation. Fourth, a call to action to sign the Youth in Evaluation manifesto and adopt the Youth in Evaluation standards was one of the key activities to foster meaningful youth engagement in evaluation in Mongolia.  In this regard, we translated the manifesto and standards into Mongolian, in order to enhance the understanding of youth engagement in evaluation among government agencies. We also produced two pitch videos for the public to explain how youth engagement in evaluation is crucial to identify new solutions that can secure the breakthroughs necessary for fast-tracking the delivery of the SDGs. As a result of this advocacy, eight local and international organizations and around 200 individuals signed the manifesto. The Youth in Evaluation week has provided us with an invaluable opportunity to delve into the untapped potential of young people in evaluation, through the implementation of the aforementioned four activities. In particular, it has allowed us to gain insights into how the youth in Mongolia perceive the evaluation sector. As this initiative was the first of its kind in Mongolia, certain aspects were not fully explored during the first Youth in Evaluation week 2023. However, we aim to incorporate these aspects in the upcoming Youth in Evaluation week 2024, to further enrich and expand opportunities for youth involvement and enhance stakeholder commitment to evaluation in Mongolia. The Youth in Evaluation week revealed many facets of the world of evaluation, especially for us the YEEs. To our great surprise, our first organization  of the Youth in Evaluation week in 2023, did not have many challenges. These could be due to two facts: the generous support of Ernst & Young, and the enormous power of our YEE interns. The only challenge we saw was a lack of interest from students to participate in the Mongolian Evaluation Case Competition as the evaluation field was so new to them and they had many other more promising competitions with higher monetary prices. As a way forward, we should budget for Youth in Evaluation week every year and seek funders of our activities. We should also form an organizing committee a few months in advance for smoother operation as all the activities are voluntary efforts carried out by people who have competing priorities. Overall, the Youth in Evaluation week revealed many facets of the world of evaluation, especially for us the YEEs, and stretched us to the extent that we could explore our potential within us and beyond us, so that, we are committed to contributing our best each year in the future for the development of the evaluation ecosystem in Mongolia and beyond. Oyundalai Odkhuu is a young and emerging evaluator at the Mongolian Evaluation Association and works as a researcher at Cognos International LLC. Connect with Oyundalai via LinkedIn.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

The Youth in Evaluation initiative is celebrating a significant milestone! Over 1,000 organizations and individuals have now signed the Youth in Evaluation manifesto, signifying a powerful global commitment to concrete actions towards long-term, sustainable and meaningful engagement of youth and young and emerging evaluators in evaluation. The signatories represent a diverse range of stakeholders, including governments, youth organizations, VOPEs, United Nations agencies, academia and the private sector. The journey so far The manifesto was launched in 2022 at the global inauguration of the Youth in Evaluation initiative. The manifesto quickly gained traction and led to the development of the Youth in Evaluation standards. The standards were unveiled during the first Youth in Evaluation week 2023. The momentum will continue at the upcoming Youth in Evaluation week 2024, which will cross fertilize practices that advance youth engagement in evaluation and uphold the standards. Join the movement If you haven’t done so already, sign the Youth in Evaluation manifesto (available in Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish and Swahili) and adopt and self-report on the standards.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

By Sarah Dickins Girlguiding UK Girlguiding is the UK’s largest youth organisation dedicated completely to girls, with around 370,000 members. We help girls know they can do anything, whether they’re 4 or 18 or in between. We show them a world of possibilities, big and small. We help them think big and be bold in a space where they can be themselves, get creative, explore, and have fun. We’re a powerful collective voice – with girls, led by girls – changing the world for the better. At Girlguiding, our commitment to amplifying girls’ voices shapes how we work. Our advocacy work is led by the advocates, a panel of young members aged 14 to 25 who act as spokespeople for Girlguiding, talking to UK Members of Parliament and other changemakers on issues that affect girls. Our youth steering group, Amplify, feeds back on internal work and processes, making sure girls’ experiences and preferences are heard at the highest levels of our organisation. But what are the implications for monitoring and evaluation? How can we understand meaningful participation in the context of girl voice? And how can girl voice enhance and innovate evaluation processes? What’s meaningful about participation? ‘Meaningful participation’ has become a widespread term since the popularisation of participatory evaluation approaches in the 1990s. Perhaps more than other types of evaluation, this term encompasses a range of understandings, experiences and techniques. Nuanced, context-sensitive and flexible by definition, there are almost as many definitions of meaningful participation as there are participatory evaluations themselves. UNICEF’s Methodological Brief on participatory approaches notes, for example, just a few of the areas in which meaningful participation can differ from context to context, including “a wide range of different types of participation, which differ in terms of what is understood by ‘participation’, whose participation is wanted, and what it is that those people are involved in and how”. For the purposes of this blog and Girlguiding’s work, however, it’s helpful to think of ‘meaningful participation’ as having two core parts: a commitment to stakeholder participation at one or more phases of an initiative or project, and a need for this participation to support the development, implementation and/or learning of an initiative or project in a genuine and purposeful way. Meaningful participation and girl voice Meaningful participation also has a particular history in the context of youth-centred projects. In his 1992 article, ‘Children’s Participation: From tokenism to citizenship’, Roger Hart applied Sherry Arnstein’s Ladder of Citizen Participation to children. The principle of this ladder is simple: if people have more opportunities to participate in processes that affect them, they are more empowered to make decisions and shape a more equal future for their communities. Hart takes this ladder metaphor further, suggesting there are increasing degrees of ‘true’ participation. As our programming and evaluation become more participatory, we see an increasing shift from adult to child leadership, direction and ownership in decision-making. Meaningful girl-centred evaluation involves investing in girls’ leadership in strategic planning and evaluation processes. So what does this mean in the context of girl and young women-centred initiatives? Whilst the principles of Hart’s framework are still relevant, there are additional considerations. Intersectional feminism argues that we interact with global power structures differently based on our unique combined experiences of gender, age, ethnicity, disability, class, religion and other factors. Using this lens, we can see that girls and young women face the overlapping challenges of being female and being young – as well as their many and varied experiences of discrimination based on ethnicity, disability and socioeconomic deprivation. And Girlguiding’s research suggests that girls’ experiences are getting worse. Our 2023 Girls’ Attitudes Survey reveals girls’ happiness levels have significantly declined over the past 15 years, with only 17% of girls aged 7-21 stating they feel very happy, compared to 40% in 2009. At Girlguiding, we try to make our girl-centred evaluations sensitive to this context. This includes evaluation practices, such as cross-disaggregating data by gender, age, ethnicity and disability; and promoting ‘brave spaces’ in focus groups, workshops and interviews, where girls are encouraged to challenge, innovate and co-create evaluation processes in a psychologically safe and confidential environment. Importantly, too, meaningful girl-centred evaluation involves investing in girls’ leadership in strategic planning and evaluation processes. One example of this work is in the development of our 2020+ Strategy, which consulted with over 50,000 girls, young women, volunteers, parents and carers, and staff. As part of this process, Girlguiding developed and delivered participatory workshops with over 1250 girls aged 5-18. Outcome mapping activities were ‘gamified’ in age-appropriate ways, for example, girls in the Rainbows section (ages 5-7) and the Brownies section (ages 7-10) were asked to help a fictitious ‘Cecil the snake’ find her colourful stripes, by identifying the things that make Girlguiding unique and special. Girls aged 10-18 in the older sections, Guides and Rangers, explored outcomes and areas of improvement by workshopping what the values and principles of a fantasy future Girlguiding might be. In both cases, data and lessons learnt from these participatory workshops has been used to shape Girlguiding’s subsequent evaluation agenda and frameworks, including our organisational theory of change and flagship 2023 impact report – which highlighted that Girlguiding girls are up to 23% more confident than UK girls not in guiding. The importance of empowering girls to lead and shape programmes was also highlighted in this consultation, contributing to the creation of Amplify, our youth steering group, who not only provide youth leadership in our organisational governance, but also deliver their own monitoring and evaluation of youth-led governance through self- and group reflection. Integrating girl voice into evaluation: task, timing and tone So, finally, how can girl voice be successfully integrated into participatory evaluation? At the end of 2022, we asked Amplify what made girls’ participation in focus groups more participatory and engaging. They gave a range of ideas, which can be summarised as the ‘task’, ‘timing’ and ‘tone’ of evaluation. First, meaningful girls’ participation in evaluation needs a suitable task. The key to meaningful participation is that it’s purposeful: you may need to hear from girls to make the evaluation more accurate, to empower girls further through evaluation, to build long-term relationships or to fulfil our strategic commitments. Whatever your reasoning, you need a clear idea of why you want to involve girls in your evaluations and, therefore, who it’s best to involve. This means being intentionally inclusive in inviting and enabling girls from a range of backgrounds, especially those who are most marginalised or those who are most affected by any issues your evaluation addresses. Second, meaningful girls’ participation needs to be well-timed. This principle is about working with girls to find appropriate moments for them to participate in evaluations. This means respecting that girls and young women often have many competing priorities for their time and energy, as well as thinking fully about the various and iterative stages of evaluation that girls can be meaningfully involved in, from design, to data collection, analysis and socialisation of findings. Thirdly, meaningful girls’ participation needs to be given an empowering tone. Adult facilitators should use respectful, non-patronising language throughout, both minimising jargon and explaining relevant technical concepts in age and context-appropriate ways. When reporting findings, relay the girls’ thoughts respectfully and, where appropriate, using the original terms and phrasing, as these may have been carefully chosen by the girl to convey their perspective. And finally, it’s always important to give credit where credit is due, acknowledging and celebrating where girls have contributed to your evaluation design, process and findings. In this way, meaningful girl participation benefits both evaluation and the girls themselves. It not only provides more accurate, creative and complete findings, it also builds long-term, respectful relationships and enables Girlguiding’s mission: to help girls know they can do anything. Sarah Dickins is a monitoring, evaluation and learning specialist who has spent the last decade working with girls and other young people around the world. She’s passionate about how participatory evaluation can empower communities. At Girlguiding UK, she delivers the Insight team’s longitudinal quasi-experimental impact study. Connect with Sarah via LinkedIn.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

By Tom Ling European Evaluation Society Years ago, I was talking to an experienced development professional about integrated nutrition programmes. I observed that the approach taken by their organisation differed from the approach taken by another leading organisation. I was curious to understand why these approaches differed, and asked if evaluation could identify good (or even better) practice. The answer was polite enough but disturbing; ‘I think, Tom, after 30 years in international development, I know what works’. The logic was implicit but clear; ‘I don’t need evaluators to tell me how to do my job’. To be honest, I have sympathy for this view. I believe the evaluation community should be more helpful. Here I suggest two ways we might be more useful. First, by putting complex programmes much more clearly in their social context and, second, by co-producing responses alongside practitioners and other decision makers. Decision makers have not always been well served by what is produced by the evaluation ecosystem. [1] What help does this ecosystem offer our professionals from the previous paragraph? In the case of integrated nutrition programmes, she might think it is not at all helpful. Undernutrition contributes globally to 45 per cent of preventable deaths in children under 5 [2], but the evaluation community is a long way from providing coherent evidence to deliver better care for children. Some years after the conversation mentioned above, a systematic review reinforced the concerns of our practitioner: There is substantial evidence of positive nutrition outcomes resulting from integrating nutrition-specific interventions into nutrition specific programmes. However, there is paucity of knowledge on establishing and sustaining effective integration of nutrition intervention in fragile context. [3] ‘What works in what context’ is a helpful starting point, and developing middle-range theories based on understanding the programme theory of change and its context is an important part of evaluation practice. However, the application of this mantra, and its relevance to highly complex programmes in ‘rugged’ operating environments [4] has multiple problems. These problems start, I believe, from designing the evaluation based on a narrow theory of change while asking: ‘based on this individual evaluation, what can we say about what works in what context?’ This immediately sets us off on the wrong foot. The importance of context was highlighted in the important work of Pawson and Tilley. [5] However, it is not clear that evaluators have taken ‘context’ sufficiently seriously. Most often, a complex programme is a very small event in a very large system. Where the programme bears fruit and delivers benefits, it is because of how it lands in, and works with, this system. The primary causal driver is often not the programme but the social systems it is part of and contributes to. In these complex circumstances, programmes will often have the following characteristics (see Woolcock, 2022 [6]): Implementing practitioners have considerable discretion when delivering the programme; ‘Success’ depends upon multiple transactions and negotiations across different individuals and organisations; The aims, resources and imperatives of the programme are only part of what drives behaviours, including behaviours of the intended beneficiaries; and Intended beneficiaries are not defined by the programme but they have agency which they use in ways which may have nothing to do with the programme (and individual-level behavioural theory may be especially unhelpful in this context). Addressing this involves putting human agency more firmly at the centre of evaluation. It is people who make things happen and not programmes. But, although it is people that drive change, people do not choose their social circumstances. [7] These circumstances include (among other things) the unequal distribution of resources and power. [8] These circumstances are not immutable, but they account for the observed patterning of social life. We need to draw more heavily on social science (among other sciences) to bring this patterning into evaluations. So where does this leave our development professional who we met in the first paragraph?. To be helpful, evaluations should relate to practitioner experience in three ways: The theory of change should include a deep understanding of the social circumstances which led to the problems arising in the first place and thwarted previous efforts, The analysis should use social science and resist over-individualising behavioural explanations without ignoring the importance of human agency, and We should understand programmes as small events in large systems and attribute causality to social processes and not to programme logics. And would our practitioner be satisfied with this? Well, to some extent but perhaps not entirely. The next piece of the ‘what works in what context’ jigsaw should involve paying much more attention to building scientific knowledge over time. We should move away from only asking ‘did the programme work’ and towards also asking ’what have we learned about how better to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the other pressing challenges of our age?’ Development professionals should be part of a learning system that uses evaluation to help answer questions that they think are important, using evidence that contributes to better informed judgements and decisions. Finally, even if we engage more fully with understanding the complex environments of international development, evaluators should, I believe, take more responsibility for collaborating with practitioners. Over two decades ago, Ziman raised the question of how professionals from a scientific background could communicate better with decision makers in politics and law. I would extend this to include how evaluators (especially those seeking to draw more heavily on social science) should engage with practitioners in international development. Ziman [9] says: Scientists who are only accustomed to the scientific mode of disputation are not well prepared for the debating rituals of transcientific controversies. They bring into the proceedings the scientific expertise and presentational skills which have stood them well professionally and find that these do not work as usual. That is to say, their accustomed rhetorical style, shaped and refined in purely scientific arenas, just does not succeed … Our aim as evaluators should be to respond positively to the ‘different rhetorical styles’ of practitioners (including, I should add, a greater willingness to challenge some of these rhetorical styles) so that practitioners (and policy makers) have more confidence that evaluations can help them do their jobs better. For this to succeed we need to redesign the evaluation ecosystem, including reconsidering how we frame problems, design evaluations, include young and emerging evaluators and engage their energy and creativity, how we conduct evaluations, and how we communicate and make sense of our findings. Contributing to this is where Eval4Action and other leading parts of our evaluation community add great value. We need to reach out to the funders and users of our evaluations as part of this redesign. In this, we need to be less mesmerised by the need to be independent, and more concerned with how we contribute to turning around our stalled SDGs and build a just transition to a better future. Editor's note: This blog was written during Tom Ling’s tenure as the President of the European Evaluation Society. Tom Ling has over 30 years of experience in designing, managing, and delivering complex evaluations focused on innovation, impact and quality. His clients have included UK Government Departments and agencies, the European Commission, UNDP, OECD, the World Bank, and many others. He is a senior research leader at RAND Europe and head of evaluation. In addition to his current role at RAND Europe, Tom has worked as head of evaluation at Save the Children, a senior research fellow and the National Audit Office and held various academic posts including Professor Emeritus at Anglia Ruskin University. He is the former President of the European Evaluation Society and an advisor to the World Bank’s Global Evaluation Initiative. Tom can be reached via LinkedIn and email at tling@randeurope.org. _ [1] The term ‘evaluation eco-system refers to the inter-locking processes through which evaluation needs are identified, evaluations are commissioned, suitable evaluation providers identified, proposals submitted, evaluations conducted, and evaluation results published and used. [2]  Abdullahi, L.H., Rithaa, G.K., Muthomi, B. et al. ‘Best practices and opportunities for integrating nutrition specific into nutrition sensitive interventions in fragile contexts: a systematic review.’ BMC Nutr 7, 46 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-021-00443-1 [3] Ibid. [4] A ‘rugged’ environment is one which is highly variable, unpredictable, and means that we cannot easily transfer lessons about best practice from one context to another. See: Pritchett, L., Samji, S., and Hammer, J. (2012) ‘It’s all about MeE: Using structured experiential learning (‘e’) to crawl the design space.’ Helsinki: UNU-WIDER Working Paper No. 2012/104 [5] R. Pawson, N. Tilley Realistic Evaluation Sage, London (1997) [6] Woolcock, M. (2022). ‘Will It Work Here? Using Case Studies to Generate ‘Key Facts’ About Complex Development Programs.’ In J. Widner, M. Woolcock, & D. Ortega Nieto (Eds.), The Case for Case Studies: Methods and Applications in International Development (Strategies for Social Inquiry, pp. 87-116). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108688253.006 [7] Or as Marx noted in the 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: "Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.” [8] Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London, Routledge. [9] Ziman J. (2000) ‘Are debatable scientific questions debatable?’ Social Epistemology, 2000, vol. 14, nos. 2 3, 187–199.

The year-end newsletter showcases Eval4Action's progress and achievements in 2023. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

By Raquel Herrera EvalYouth Costa Rica & ReLAC This blog delves into the basic concepts and methodology of the Participatory Evaluation model, with the hope that it will lead to an understanding of why this model is a masterstroke for governments in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This model comes from a theoretical background based on the Constructivist and Transformative Paradigms (Mertens, 2005), emphasizing how individuals construct their own understanding of reality through their experiences and specific contexts (i.e., geographical, cultural, social, political, and economic). Acknowledging these multiple perspectives and the nuances in the social construction of knowledge opens the possibility of reflexivity and collaboration to recognize social injustices and power imbalances. This reflexivity through communal conversations allows stakeholders to build more sophisticated and collective knowledge about specific and general subjects in languages and spaces close to the people involved. The manual, Sowing and Harvesting by Tapella, Rodriguez, Sanz, Chaves, and Espinoza (2021), available on the EvalParticipativa website, is a fundamental text for those embarking on Participatory Evaluation. It mentions that this model aims for the involvement of all stakeholders in all the different stages of the evaluation, starting with the methodological design of the evaluation until the dissemination of the results. The SDGs aim to address global challenges and achieve a sustainable and equitable future, “leaving no one behind”. The ideas mentioned above align with Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, as it explicitly states that “74. Follow-up and review processes at all levels will be guided by the following principles: d. They will be open, inclusive, participatory, and transparent for all people and will support the reporting by all relevant stakeholders.” The best way to ensure community engagement in achieving the SDGs is to empower the people to have conversations about their issues and promote their involvement in all the stages of the evaluation process. These conversations among and within stakeholders will bring visibility to the main topics and other subtle issues around each SDG. The community ownership of the interventions, involving a participatory approach to decision-making, where community members have a say in how resources are used and in the planning of projects that benefit everyone, will be encouraged by the sense of belonging and involvement in developing strategies for solving local problems. After all, we all want to live better. The best way to ensure community engagement in achieving the SDGs is to empower the people to have conversations about their issues and promote their involvement in all the stages of the evaluation process. In order to open participatory spaces for all stakeholders, the evaluation of SDGs must be coherent with equity criteria, local contexts, and local knowledge. Among the many benefits of this model is that stakeholders can tailor each intervention to meet their needs. Taking ownership of interventions in the communities makes them sustainable primarily through institutional support for initiatives based on community needs. This means that sustainability is not determined by the efforts of public management but rather by the interests, contexts, cultures, and territories of the people involved. Because of the local interpretation of the problems and the corresponding solutions, Participatory Evaluation can be used to address each SDG in a way that conforms to each community's point of view. As a result of the community's involvement in the evaluation, the stakeholders develop new capabilities and strengthen the ones they already have, promoting the continuity of the processes because now they have the know-how and the confidence to run a process by themselves. These capabilities remain in the communities, and, as has been seen in practice, these participatory evaluations have an even greater reach by creating local networks with other communities or social groups. Now, the question is, how can this be done? A peer work process is an effective method for navigating the methodological framework of an evaluation. In participatory evaluations, the evaluator's role takes on a facilitator's nuance. This means that stakeholders decide together what to evaluate, when to assess, and how to evaluate, as well as to analyze the data and communicate the results. To begin, we can mention seven principles of Participatory Evaluations (Tapella et al., 2021) that have been collectively constructed by a group of Latin American evaluators involved in evaluations of this type. The principles are: 1. The stakeholders relevant to the intervention or situation being evaluated are actively and consciously incorporated into the evaluation process as subjects of rights. 2. Local knowledge is recognized as valid and essential for evaluation. 3. Institutional representatives work in partnership with local stakeholders in the design, implementation, and interpretation of the evaluation findings. 4. The use of didactic techniques and materials facilitates dialogue by generating spaces and procedures for the collection, analysis, and use of information. 5. The participating stakeholders are accountable for both evaluation processes and results. 6. The evaluation process strengthens local planning and decision-making skills. 7. External evaluators act as facilitators of the evaluation process. At this point, it is important to highlight two ideas: 1. The role of the evaluator is more of a facilitator. As part of their most fundamental work, evaluators must understand the stakeholders’ context as it determines the calls for participation, the use and application of research instruments, and their systematization. 2. A greater amount of responsibility and foresight is fundamental in the application of the research and evaluation instruments. While it's true that this model demands a longer development period and relies on the available resources for evaluation, it serves as a critical means to ensure the sustainability of actions aimed at achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). I believe that Participatory Evaluation makes a significant contribution to restoring citizenship, which has been taken from people in many ways. In the present day, political discourse is primarily focused on representative democracy, which, in theory and its purest form, should reflect the visions and voices of the communities it represents. However, in many cases, it provides less opportunity for active citizen participation. The participatory model, on the other hand, empowers people and promotes an environment for active listening between stakeholders. In addition, if the public makes its voice heard, legislators will be required to act on its behalf. For greater outcomes regarding the SDGs, the Participatory Evaluation model promotes that the achievement of these goals is not so much a matter of political will or ideological positions but rather a cultural change in the way life is understood. This means, understanding life as an integral space of equity, participation and listening, in which the knowledge of all living and non-living beings, as well as the environment as a whole, is taken into consideration. The participatory approach is a historical debt that governments owe to the public and the environment, whether designing public policies or conducting evaluations. Democratic societies must guarantee communal participatory spaces and secure the link between the institutional ecosystem and society. References Tapella, E., Rodríguez, P., Sanz, J., Chavez, J., Espinosa, J. (2021). Manual Siembra y Cosecha. Instituto Alemán de Evaluación de la Cooperación para el Desarrollo (DEval). Mertens, D. M. (2005). Research and Evaluation in Education and-Psychology. Sage press. Raquel Herrera is an emerging evaluator from Costa Rica, holding an undergraduate degree in Social Communication and a Master's degree in Evaluation of Developmental Programs and Projects from the University of Costa Rica. Currently, she is the Chair of the national EvalYouth Costa Rica chapter and a member of the current Executive Committee of ReLAC, the Network for Monitoring, Evaluation, and Systematization of Latin America and the Caribbean. Raquel's work primarily revolves around Participatory, Indigenous, and Decolonizing Evaluation, reflecting her keen interest and extensive involvement in these areas. Raquel can reached at raquel.herrer@gmail.com.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

By Miriam Ordoñez EvalYouth LAC Summary When faced with the complexity of evaluating progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals, governance is the best way to mobilize the participation, resources, and knowledge of multiple stakeholders. EvalYouth chapters bring together young and emerging evaluators (YEEs) to promote their own professional development. As such, through their voluntary action, they have a more relevant role than is commonly recognized in shaping the governance of the evaluation ecosystem. However, encouraging the participation and self-organization of YEEs is a goal that should not be underestimated, as it entails multiple challenges. Understanding the personal motivations of YEEs is key to this end, but so is a democratic context that promotes their participation. In 2017, I joined a voluntary organization of professional evaluators (VOPEs) for the first time. I was just starting out in the evaluation field and hoping to make connections with the evaluation community in Mexico. Almost immediately after I became a member of the VOPE, the organization’s leaders decided to manage the volunteer work around various thematic initiatives, including EvalYouth. Together with other young evaluators who, like me, were interested in strengthening our capacities, we founded EvalYouthMx [1]. A couple of years later I found myself leading the EvalYouthLAC initiative, and now it is clear to me that VOPEs and initiatives are part of a far-reaching institutional and normative architecture. Instigated by the designation of 2015 as the ‘Year of Evaluation’, and the setting of the first Global Evaluation Agenda to raise the voices of evaluators in the same year, participation in evaluation and the use of evaluation results to identify key focus areas to achieve the desired goals has been growing in prominence within this architecture. The Global Evaluation Agenda promotes a positive enabling environment for evaluation and evidence-based policymaking advocacy. This means collective action among multiple governmental and non-governmental actors to promote a culture of collaboration; influence the creation of sound policies and the allocation of public resources; strengthen monitoring and evaluation systems; innovate new approaches and methodologies; and insist on the professionalization of evaluators. This is why evaluating progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is, above all, about governance. Governance can be understood as both a means and an end (Monkelbann, 2019). An end, because countries are primarily responsible for achieving the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, and it is essential that they make progress in strengthening the capacities of their institutions to ensure accountability and transparency, and in forging participatory societies that demand accountability for development results through evaluation. Faced with the complexity of achieving sustainable development, all forms of collaboration count, and voluntary work carried out by EvalYouth chapters has a relevant role in increasing the involvement of youth in the promotion of evaluation. Additionally, governance demands the revitalization of multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development (SDG 17). According to the 2030 Agenda, these partnerships should share knowledge, resources, and innovations for the achievement of the SDGs. Faced with the complexity of achieving sustainable development, all forms of collaboration count, and voluntary work carried out by EvalYouth chapters has a relevant role in increasing the involvement of youth in the promotion of evaluation as a means of promoting transparency and accountability in development policies. They also bring together and make positive use of the volunteer work of YEEs to further their own professional development and leadership in the evaluation ecosystem. In addition, the creation and sustainability of EvalYouth chapters is an exercise in network governance. However, encouraging the participation and self-organization of young evaluators is a goal that should not be underestimated, as it entails multiple challenges. Some reflections, in the context of the EvalYothLAC experience, are outlined below. 1. YEEs initiatives are spaces that contribute to reducing institutional disaffection (Torcal, 2006) among young people According to the University of Cambridge, young people in Latin America currently experience two phenomena: the first is democratic apathy; that is, scepticism about institutions and a low interest in getting involved in politics. The second is democratic antipathy, which is generated when there is a systematic exclusion of youth and the violation of their rights by the state. [2] This provokes a rejection of democracies, especially when they are living in unstable political regimes, whose institutions do not encourage youth development and participation. Considering the challenges currently faced by Latin American democracies, EvalYouth initiatives are spaces in which values of good governance, such as citizen participation, and transparent and accountable institutions, are promoted. Thus, YEE networks can contribute directly or indirectly to diminishing youth apathy and democratic antipathy. 2. YEE chapters represent a network governance challenge in themselves Sustainable development issues are complex, and often beyond the capacity of individual states. The active involvement of non-governmental actors is fundamental to making progress in tackling global challenges. The ideal of network governance is horizontal government, which functions particularly through self-organization and inter-organization among diverse actors and citizens. 3. Coordination and involvement of young people Young people are not typically taught how to coordinate themselves to solve public problems, much less how to get involved in voluntary initiatives. EvalYouth chapters provide a platform for young individuals to exercise their rights to free association and citizen participation. 4. Challenges of self-organization YEE chapters face challenges related to self-organization and collaboration with other actors in the evaluation ecosystem, such as VOPEs, international organizations and even governmental actors. Endogenously, the capacities of members to coordinate, communicate, and achieve common goals vary significantly. 5. Importance of trust and incentives Trust-building and creating incentives for voluntary participation are crucial for successful self-organization within YEE chapters. It is important to note that work within the framework of EvalYouth chapters is voluntary, and although they are coordinated by elected leaders, this does not give them a position of authority over other members of the chapters. A leader’s task is to coordinate and steer their chapter’s different aims, resources, knowledge, and efforts. To achieve this purpose, self-organization is crucial, but this requires weaving bonds of trust and creating incentives to encourage voluntary participation. Governance is continuously associated with institutions, but rarely with human interactions. Yet these human interactions are indispensable for cooperation. 6. Motivation and governance for SDGs Motivation is essential to sustain the evaluation ecosystem, while governance mechanisms enable its functioning. Effective and affective governance is seen as necessary for evaluating and achieving the SDGs. EvalYouthLAC seeks to contribute to both enabling the participation of YEEs, and encouraging their self-organization towards their professionalization while supporting innovation in our practice. References Monkelbaan, J. (2019). Governance for the Sustainable Development Goals. Singapur: Springer. Torcal, M. (2006). “Desafección institucional e historia democrática en las nuevas democracias”. Revista SAAP. 2:3, agosto, pp. 591-634. Miriam Ordoñez holds a PhD in Development Studies in Latin America from the Mora Institute. For 12 years she has been a public official, professor, researcher, external consultant, and volunteer in strategic planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Currently, she co-leads the Executive Committee 2023-2025 of EvalYouth LAC which seeks the professional development of young and emerging evaluators. Reach out to her via miriam.orbal@gmail.com. _ [1] EvalYouth Mexico was initially formed in 2017 within the National Academy of Mexican Evaluators (ACEVAL) by Gerardo Sánchez, Daniela Dorantes, Evelyn Aguado, and me. [2] Luminate (2022). Youth and Democracy in Latin America. Retrieved from: https://luminategroup.com/storage/1459/EN_Youth_Democracy_Latin_America.pdf

On 7 November 2023, Eval4Action partners, youth organizations, international organizations, Voluntary Organizations for Professional Evaluation (VOPEs), academia, the private sector, and the evaluation community at large, convened virtually to dialogue on the use and uptake of the Youth in Evaluation standards. The event also marked the launch of lessons from a pioneering approach by UNFPA in engaging youth in the formative evaluation of UNFPA support to adolescents and youth. Through a groundbreaking Youth Steering Committee working alongside senior evaluation professionals, this experience has been a model of innovative youth engagement in evaluation. For the first time in the United Nations system, young people were involved in the evaluation as contributors, evaluators and key informants as well as co-managers and co-decision makers. This engagement was also supported by the EvalYouth Global Network. A publication release and film premiere on this experience fostered a broader discussion on practical and actionable strategies to apply the Youth in Evaluation standards in various contexts. Watch the event recording Speaker line-up

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

Read updates on the campaign activities and news from partners around the world. If you would like to receive the newsletter directly in your inbox, sign up to receive Eval4Action updates here. As an individual advocate or a partner network, if you have news or information to share with the Eval4Action community, please write to contact@eval4action.org.

By Sarah Farina Broadleaf Consulting On April 26, 2023, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/77/283, titled "Strengthening Voluntary National Reviews through Country-led Evaluation." This Resolution, led by Nigeria and co-sponsored by 24 Member States, marks a pivotal moment for the evaluation community. The resolution calls for countries to prioritize country-led evaluations of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and integrate evaluative evidence into decision-making processes. The resolution also calls on countries to include evaluation components in their Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs). VNRs are the primary platform at the United Nations for countries to share best practices, success stories, and common challenges in SDG implementation. This resolution follows on other work at the United Nations which emphasizes the importance of evaluation, notably a resolution in 2014 that committed to building evaluation capacity. Both the 2014 and the 2023 resolution were supported by EvalPartners, a partnership between the United Nations, Voluntary Organizations for Professional Evaluation (VOPEs), governments, parliamentarians, civil society organizations, development banks and other partners. It has been my privilege to Chair the EvalPartners Task Force that supported this resolution with the help of diverse partners. The Task Force worked closely to support Nigeria and the other Member States that co-sponsored and supported the development of this resolution. The 2023 resolution represents a momentous shift in political will, with countries taking leadership of evaluation and making strong commitments to commissioning and using evaluation to support decision-making, policy formulation, development of national strategies and reporting on SDGs through VNRs. The resolution provides guidance for how countries can use evaluation to create effective and more equitable strategies, plans and policies. The resolution highlights the following key messages: Evaluation is instrumental in providing timely and credible evidence to regain and accelerate progress towards the SDGs. Countries are encouraged to present regular VNRs with a country-led evaluation component. Evaluative evidence can empower governments to improve decision-making for effective and more equitable strategies, plans and policies. Evaluation should include the full, equal and meaningful participation of all relevant stakeholders, including local governments, Indigenous Peoples, civil society organizations, academia, and the private sector. The adoption of resolution A/RES/77/283 is an important step in encouraging broad use of country-led evaluation to accelerate the SDGs, and we must all consider what we can each contribute to implementing the resolution. Bringing this resolution to life will rely on building new relationships and thinking creatively. There are some clear next steps: Raising awareness of the resolution among countries and stakeholders. Building an enabling environment for evaluation at the country level. Developing guidelines and tools for equity-focused and gender-responsive evaluation. Consolidating lessons learned and sharing experience and insights about how to integrate evaluation and evaluative evidence into VNRs. In order to focus effectively on the greatest contributions that can be made by each sector, there are some key roles that can make a difference: Leadership by national governments National governments hold the key to the successful implementation of evaluation. Governments will be most effective where they demonstrate the political will to prioritize establishing an enabling environment for evaluation, build evaluation capacities, foster partnerships with evaluation stakeholders, and embed evaluation mechanisms in their development plans and strategies. Governments have the power to focus evaluation on national priorities, use evaluation to inform evidence-based policymaking and improve and adapt policies and programmes, and direct their investments where they are most effective and impactful. All actors can play a role in advocating for governments to take leadership on evaluation. Governments have the power to focus evaluation on national priorities, use evaluation to inform evidence-based policymaking and improve and adapt policies and programmes, and direct their investments where they are most effective and impactful. United Nations agencies as partners United Nations agencies could prioritize partnering with countries who wish to lead evaluations at the national level to support decision-making and use in their VNRs. This could include supporting countries to develop evaluation frameworks, building evaluation capacities throughout the government agencies with responsibilities related to evaluation, including planning, statistics, evaluation and reporting on VNRs, and fostering a culture of evidence-based decision-making within their government agencies and decision-making structures. Additionally, collaboration among United Nations agencies and evaluation partners is crucial for leveraging resources, knowledge sharing, and ensuring coordinated efforts towards sustainable development. Empowering evaluation commissioners Evaluation commissioners such as funders, government agencies and parliaments play a pivotal role in driving evaluation efforts. They have the opportunity to ensure that evaluation is structured to support national goals, and they can allocate sufficient resources and ensure that evaluation findings are integrated into decision-making processes and policy formulation. Additionally, evaluation commissioners can facilitate partnerships and collaborations to empower various stakeholders to strengthen evaluation systems and practices. Civil society at the core of evaluation VOPEs are essential stakeholders in promoting and supporting evaluation. They play a vital role in capacity building, knowledge sharing, and promoting evaluation practices at the national and sub-national levels. VOPEs will need to keep themselves aware of activities related to the resolution so that their leadership can ensure that VOPEs support and collaborate with others involved in evaluating the SDGs. Many other organizations, networks and initiatives are also joining in the movement to advocate for or build the evaluation field, ensuring that evaluation is inclusive, seen through a lens of gender equity, and responsive to key social and environmental priorities. Besides fostering connections within and between these entities, it's crucial to empower and support young and emerging evaluators in leading the development of evaluation practices aligned with local and global values and priorities. VOPEs will need to keep themselves aware of activities related to the resolution so that their leadership can ensure that VOPEs support and collaborate with others involved in evaluating the SDGs. In support of implementing the resolution, VOPEs, EvalPartners and its networks EvalYouth, EvalGender+, EvalIndigenous, Global Parliamentarians Forum for Evaluation, EvalSDGs and other evaluation actors can prioritize supporting implementation of the resolution. This may include convening evaluation actors to learn and share their experiences, and actively engaging with national governments, United Nations agencies, and evaluation commissioners to advocate for and support the evaluation of SDGs and the inclusion of evaluation in the VNR process. Building the evaluation ecosystem EvalPartners launched a Global EvalAgenda in 2015 to provide a shared agenda for actors across sectors who wanted to contribute to building the evaluation ecosystem. There are many more actors in the ecosystem now than when EvalPartners first launched the Global EvalAgenda. We have the opportunity to learn more about the evolving ways that different organizations and networks are building capacity, developing practice and using evaluation. It is important at this time to acknowledge and value the contributions being made across the ecosystem toward our shared goals. I’m excited to see some of these big picture aspirations reflected in the renewed EvalAgenda currently in development and I hope that anyone who has an interest in evaluation is either part of the process or connects with the process to ensure that the coming EvalAgenda is a true reflection of the potential of our many roles and approaches. If those of us who have a stake in evaluation can align with this resolution and bolster the commitment of countries to evaluation through our advocacy and support to governments to incorporate evaluation into VNRs and use evaluation for decision-making, we have a significant opportunity to contribute to SDG acceleration. I am confident that, together, we can use this resolution to make a real difference in advancing towards the SDGs to improve the lives of people around the world. I urge you to be creative and consider what role you can play in implementing the resolution on “Strengthening Voluntary National Reviews through Country-led Evaluation." This blog was co-published on the EvalPartners website. Sarah Farina is Founder and Principal at Broadleaf Consulting. She chaired the EvalPartners Task Force supporting the recently adopted UN Resolution on evaluation co-sponsored by 24 Member States. She has served as Treasurer for the International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation (IOCE) and EvalPartners and she is a past President of the Canadian Evaluation Society. Follow Sarah on Twitter and contact her via sfarina@broadleafconsulting.ca.