Skip to main content

Table 2 Purpose of frameworks and their intended users

From: Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study

Document

Purposes

Intended users

Danida (2012) [13]

“Constitutes the basic framework for evaluations of Danish development cooperation” (p. 3)

“Those who have a professional engagement in evaluation of development cooperation, as well as others interested in evaluation. These include those who are parties to an evaluation process and the users of evaluations. Moreover, the guidelines may be of interest to a broader audience, such as students, researchers and policy makers, and the interested public” (p. 3)

“Do not constitute a manual in evaluation methods and techniques” (p. 3)

Danida (2011) [14]

“Know[ing] more about results management and the … approach Danida uses” (p. 1)

“The main audience for the framework is Danida staff” (p. 1)

“Clarify[ing] how Danida manages the process [of achieving and demonstrating results] towards this goal [of securing value for money and aid effectiveness]” (p. 1)

ESSENCE (2011) [11]

“To improve harmonization among funders of health research capacity strengthening. Its use should make it easier for recipients of funding to fulfil the PM&E obligations of different funders and facilitate synergy, division of labour and sharing of knowledge among funders” (p. 4)

“[hopefully] ESSENCE members [typically funders] and other partners will have access” (p. 2)

TDR (2011) [15]

“A tool … [that] promotes and guides systematic assessment of TDR’s strategic and technical relevance and contribution towards its vision” (p. 5)

“For use both by TDR staff and the broad range of stakeholders involved in the governance and implementation of TDR’s Ten Year Vision and Strategy” (p. 5)

“Guides TDR staff and stakeholders through a more systematic way of monitoring and evaluating the Programme’s performance” (p. 6)

FIC-NIH (2005) [16]

Not explicitly stated. Describes roles and responsibilities in relation to organisational systems and suggests evaluation questions and indicators

Not explicitly stated. Program Officers, Principal Investigators, external evaluators and staff of partner institutions are among those whose roles in assessment are described

WOTRO (2005)

Not explicitly stated. Specifies data to be collected and presented in reviews

Not explicitly stated. The review committee [external evaluators] and programme partners are mentioned in the document

IDRC (2005) [17]

“A generic guide for the assessment of any capacity development activity or project component supported by [IDRC]; and for any form of assessment (formative or summative; monitoring or evaluation)” (p. 2)

Not explicitly stated. Implicitly, anyone assessing any capacity development activity supported by IDRC. Refers to “the evaluator” at points

IDRC (2004) [18]

“Promote coherence between the aims and objectives expressed at the corporate level and those expressed at the program level” (p. 4)

Managers within IDRC. Also briefly mentions roles for program teams, centre support units, and the Board of Governors

“Help managers make decisions that support programming efforts to achieve the IDRC mission” (p. 2)

“Provides a structure for organizing and reporting on results at the corporate level” (p. 2)

CIDA (2004) [19]

“Ensure that the Agency’s staff, consultants and partners are properly informed about how evaluations of CIDA’s investments … are to be carried out, and what they are expected to achieve” (Foreword)

“Staff, consultants and partners” (Foreword)

“A thorough reading offers an in–depth understanding of the Agency’s evaluation activities. Or, individual items of interest can be quickly accessed. Uninitiated readers can learn about the fundamentals of the evaluation process, while seasoned practitioners can benefit from normative guidance to complete the task–at–hand” (p. 1)