Comments on: Evaluation: Beyond accountability to change. http://thewomensfoundation.org/2007/evaluation-beyond-accountability-to-change/ Washington Area Women's Foundation Fri, 03 Feb 2012 00:03:32 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: winter moncler jackets http://thewomensfoundation.org/2007/evaluation-beyond-accountability-to-change/comment-page-1/#comment-242898 winter moncler jackets Sun, 11 Sep 2011 12:01:32 +0000 http://dev.wawf.org/2007/evaluation-beyond-accountability-to-change/#comment-242898 Good I found this wonderful blog. Really good post! Thanks for the information. Without a doubt I will be back to check out your site soon. Good I found this wonderful blog. Really good post! Thanks for the information. Without a doubt I will be back to check out your site soon.

]]> By: Lisa Kays http://thewomensfoundation.org/2007/evaluation-beyond-accountability-to-change/comment-page-1/#comment-159 Lisa Kays Tue, 27 Mar 2007 20:54:42 +0000 http://dev.wawf.org/2007/evaluation-beyond-accountability-to-change/#comment-159 C, I couldn't agree more...one of my favorite terms in a past life working on African development issues was the concept of "mutual accountability," and of doing evaluations from the bottom up, as well as top down--which I think we also apply here at The Women's Foundation since we constantly evaluate ourselves, and not just our partners. And invite our partners to evaluate us, which is crucial (and scary). :D I also remember the many, many issues that arose from our NGO partners in Africa who talked about how much time and waste was generated when they had to constantly be altering their benchmarks, reporting styles, etc. for various funders--not to mention how much information was lost. Moving towards a landscape where common indicators and reports are the norm would do so much not only to save time and energy, but also move everyone towards really defining and then demonstrating whether social change is taking place or not across a broad swath of cities, communities, etc...and not just across projects. I do wonder if we'll ever get there, and how. It's a scary call on many levels and I sometimes wonder if debating the intricacies is a safe way to really keep ourselves from owning up and looking at whether our work is achieving the results we want. It's a scary question, with lots of scary implications if the answer isn't what we want it to be. C, I couldn’t agree more…one of my favorite terms in a past life working on African development issues was the concept of “mutual accountability,” and of doing evaluations from the bottom up, as well as top down–which I think we also apply here at The Women’s Foundation since we constantly evaluate ourselves, and not just our partners.

And invite our partners to evaluate us, which is crucial (and scary). :D

I also remember the many, many issues that arose from our NGO partners in Africa who talked about how much time and waste was generated when they had to constantly be altering their benchmarks, reporting styles, etc. for various funders–not to mention how much information was lost.

Moving towards a landscape where common indicators and reports are the norm would do so much not only to save time and energy, but also move everyone towards really defining and then demonstrating whether social change is taking place or not across a broad swath of cities, communities, etc…and not just across projects.

I do wonder if we’ll ever get there, and how. It’s a scary call on many levels and I sometimes wonder if debating the intricacies is a safe way to really keep ourselves from owning up and looking at whether our work is achieving the results we want.

It’s a scary question, with lots of scary implications if the answer isn’t what we want it to be.

]]>