Displaying 121 - 130 of 1964

Integrating HIV services with other health services to improve care, retention and adherence

Scoping paper 3ie PDF icon 2017  

This scoping paper by Heard and colleagues summaries a range of activities 3ie undertook to assess stakeholder demands and priorities for generating new impact evaluation evidence on the effectiven

Moving impact evaluations beyond controlled circumstances

The constraints imposed by an intervention can often make designing an evaluation quite challenging. If a large-scale programme is rolled out nationally, for instance, it becomes very hard to find a credible comparison group. Many evaluators would shy away from evaluating programmes when it is hard to find a plausible counterfactual. Since it’s also harder to publish the findings of such evaluations, there don’t seem to be many incentives for evaluating such programmes.

The importance of buy-in from key actors for impact evaluations to influence policy

At a public forum on impact evaluation a couple of years ago, Arianna Legovini, head of the World Bank’s Development Impact Evaluation programme (DIME), declared that ‘dissemination is dead’. But her statement does not imply that we should stop the dissemination of impact evaluation findings for influencing policy.

Can we learn more from clinical trials than simply methods?

What if scientists directly tested their drug ideas on humans without first demonstrating their potential efficacy in labs? This question sounds hypothetical because we all know that using untested drugs can be potentially dangerous. If we were then to use the same logic, should we not be exercising similar caution with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of social and economic development interventions involving human subjects?

Shining a light on the unknown knowns

Donald Rumsfeld, a former US Secretary of Defense, famously noted the distinction between known knowns(things we know we know), known unknowns (things we know we don’t know), and unknown unknowns (things we don’t know we don’t know). In international development research, these same distinctions exist.

How will they ever learn?

The low-quality of education in much of the developing world is no secret. The Annual status of education report (Aser), produced by the Indian NGO Pratham, has been documenting the poor state of affairs in that country for several years. The most recent report highlights the fact that more than half of grade five students can read only at grade two level.

A pitch for better use of mixed methods in impact evaluations

At the opening session of 3ie’s recent Measuring Results conference, Jyotsna Puri, Deputy Executive Director and Head of Evaluation at 3ie, said, “It takes a village to do an impact evaluation.” What she meant was that, for an impact evaluation to be successful and policy relevant, research teams need to be diverse and include a mix of disciplines, such as statisticians, anthropologists, economists, surveyors, enumerators and policy experts, as well as use the most appropriate mix of evaluation and research methods.

Using impact evaluation to improve policies and programmes

Community-level water supply does not have health benefits. There is emerging evidence that community-driven development programmes do not increase social cohesion. These statements can be made with confidence based on the considerable body of evidence from impact evaluations undertaken to answer the question of what works in development. 3ie is now adding this body of evidence as more completed studies are becoming available.

How useful are systematic reviews in international development?

Systematic reviews summarise all the evidence on a particular intervention or programme and were first developed in the health sector.  The health reviews have a specific audience: doctors, nurses and health practitioners. The audience is also easily able to find the systematic reviews. But there seems to be a big difference in the accessibility of evidence between the health and development sectors.
27 - 31
March 2017

African Evaluation Association conference

Conferences 27 - 31 March 2017
3ie co-sponsored and participated in the Eighth African Evaluation Association (AfrEA) International Conference 2017 held in Kampala, Uganda from 27-31 March.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 14508

Strengthening Civil Society: an Evidence Gap Map IER

Evidence gap map 2021 Publication type :
Author : Miriam Berretta, Charlotte Lane, Katherine Garcia, Ingunn Storhaug, Jane Hammaker, Douglas Glandon, Laura Adams, John Eyers, , ,
Sector : Public administration

Independent media and free flow of information: an evidence gap map

Evidence gap map 2021 Publication type :
Author : Miriam Berretta, Charlotte Lane, Tomiak Kerstin, Katherine Garcia, Ingunn Storhaug, Jane Hammaker, Douglas Glandon, John Eyers
Sector : Public administration

Interventions to Improve Childhood Immunisation and Related Outcomes in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Evidence Gap Map

Evidence gap map 2021 Publication type :
Author : Mark Engelbert, Monica Jain, Avantika Bagai, Shradha Parsekar
Sector : Health

Promoting political competition through electoral processes in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence gap map

Evidence gap map 2021 Publication type :
Author : Constanza Gonzalez Parrao, Etienne Lwamba, Cem Yavuz, Saad Gulzar, Miriam Berretta, Jane Hammaker, Charlotte Lane, Katherine Quant, John Eyers, Douglas Glandon
Sector : Public administration

Strengthening good governance through government effectiveness in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence gap map

Evidence gap map 2021 Publication type :
Author : Constanza Gonzalez Parrao, Etienne Lwamba, Lina Khan, Malte Lierl, Miriam Berretta, Jane Hammaker, Charlotte Lane, Katherine Quant, John Eyers, Douglas Glandon
Sector : Public administration

Building Resilient Societies in Low- and Middle-income Countries: An Evidence Gap Map

Evidence gap map 2023 Publication type :
Author : Miriam Beretta, Sanghwa Lee, Meital Kupfer, Carolyn Huang, Will Ridlehoover, Daniel Frey, Faez Ahmed, Binyang Song, Kristen Marie Edwards, Jaron Porciello, John Eyers, Birte Snilstveit
Sector : Social protection

Improving Food Security in Humanitarian Settings: An Evidence Gap Map

Evidence gap map 2022 Publication type :
Author : Cem Yavuz, Paul Fenton Villar, Miriam Berretta, Ashiqun Nabi, Chris Cooper, Shanon Shisler
Sector : Social protection

The Effect of Transparency and Accountability Interventions in the Extractive Sectors: An Evidence Gap Map

Evidence gap map 2019 Publication type :
Author : Francis Rathinam, Juliette Finetti, Zeba Siddiqui, Birte Snilstveit, Hannah Chirgwin, Richard Appell, Eleanor Dickens, Marie Gaarder
Sector : Energy and extractives

Group-based Livelihood Interventions in L&MICs

Evidence gap map 2019 Publication type :
Author : Bidisha Barooah, Shonar Lala Chinoy, Priyanka Dubey, Ritwik Sarkar, Avantika Bagai
Sector : Agriculture, fishing, and forestry

Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Evidence Gap Map: 2018 Update

Evidence gap map 2018 Publication type :
Author : Hugh Waddington, Hannah Chirgwin, Duae Zehra, Sandy Cairncross, Raj Popat, Miriam Berretta, Hastings Chipungu, Abubeker Tadesse
Sector : Water, sanitation, and waste management