What methods may be used in impact evaluations of humanitarian assistance?

What methods may be used in impact evaluations of humanitarian assistance?

3ie Working Paper 22

Jyotsna Puri , Anastasia Aladysheva, Vegard Iversen, Yashodhan Ghorpade and Tilman Brück

Since 2005, more than US$90 billion has been spent on humanitarian assistance. Humanitarian crises are complex situations where demand for aid very often exceeds supply. The humanitarian assistance community has long asked for better evidence on how aid money can be spent more effectively.

This paper by Jyotsna Puri , Anastasia Aladysheva, Vegard Iversen, Yashodhan Ghorpade and Tilman Brück explores the methodological options and challenges associated with collecting and generating high-quality evidence needed to answer important questions on the impact of humanitarian assistance. These questions include whether assistance is reaching the target populations and at the right time, whether it is bringing about desired changes in their lives and whether it is being delivered in effective doses and ways, with manageable costs.

The paper also uses six case studies to discuss methods for undertaking impact evaluations to address these concerns in a range of humanitarian contexts, from unanticipated natural disaster-related emergencies to protracted crises.

This working paper is part of background scoping research and consultation undertaken to assess the scope and methods for impact evaluation in the humanitarian sector. The scoping paper, What evidence is available and what is required, in humanitarian assistance?, provides an independent analysis of the evidence base of evaluations in humanitarian assistance and identifies key gaps and priorities in need of rigorous evidence.

Transparency and accountability in the extractives sector: a synthesis of what works and what does not

Transparency and accountability in the extractives sector: a synthesis of what works and what does not

Working paper 3ie 2019
This paper synthesises key lessons from seven impact evaluations of these initiatives in the extractives sector. The synthesis shows that providing information alone may not be sufficient. Instead, information combined with deliberations positively affect knowledge, trust and demand for accountability.

3ie evidence gap maps: a starting point for strategic evidence production and use

3ie evidence gap maps: a starting point for strategic evidence production and use

Working paper 3ie 2017

Evidence Gap Maps (EGMs) provide an important tool for evidence-informed policymaking and strategic research prioritisation.

wp32

Integrating impact evaluation and implementation research to accelerate evidence-informed action

Working paper 3ie 2018
The authors of this paper use three case studies in which researchers and implementers integrated implementation research and impact evaluation, highlighting what worked or what was missed and provide practical recommendations.

WP31

Synthesis of impact evaluations of the World Food Programme’s nutrition interventions in humanitarian settings in the Sahel

Working paper 3ie 2018

Acute malnutrition in the Sahel region affects an estimated 6 million children under the age of 5, of whom approximately 1.4 million require treatment for severe acute malnutrition.

WP30

Community-driven development: does it build social cohesion or infrastructure? A mixed-method evidence synthesis

Working paper 3ie 2018

In community-driven development (CDD) programmes, community members are in charge of identifying, implementing and maintaining externally funded development projects.