Annex II: Significant Milestones in Monitoring and Evaluation at IFAD

• The evaluation function was established at IFAD as part of the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Division shortly after the organization came into being in 1978. At that time, evaluation was combined with monitoring because the IFAD portfolio, consisting typically of projects lasting for seven years, plus extension, was not ready for evaluation. The M&E Division reported at that time to the Assistant President, Economic Policy Department. As noted below, significant changes have been taking place since then in the way monitoring and evaluation are organized at IFAD.

• On the basis of a proposal made in 1987 by the United States, the Evaluation Committee of the Executive Board was established to assist the Executive Board by undertaking in-depth reviews of a selected number of evaluations and studies, relieving the Board of those duties. Until 1999, the work of the Evaluation Committee was governed by organizational principles adopted by the First Session of the Evaluation Committee. Although the TOR of the Evaluation Committee were not spelled out, these principles stated that the Rules of Procedure of the Executive Board should be applied, mutatis mutandis, to the work of the Evaluation Committee.

• In 1994, the evaluation function was separated from monitoring and an independent Office of Evaluation and Studies was established as a result of recommendations made by the rapid external assessment of IFAD during the negotiation of the Fourth Replenishment of IFAD’s Resources. The assessment also recommended “direct reporting to the President of the Fund and to the Board”. The OE Director started reporting directly to the President, and OE was then incorporated into the Office of the President.

• The self-assessment process that IFAD’s operations has been pursuing to measure and monitor results of project implementation has evolved over time to respond to new priorities and to become increasingly efficient and comprehensive. This process, however, has not been fully effective in serving as a basis for the aggregation and coherent tracking of results. This is due mainly to diversity in defining baseline situations and indicators, lack of a unified methodology and shortcomings in the M&E capacity of ongoing projects. IFAD has taken several steps in recent years to address these constraints, but it will take several years to institutionalize self-assessment for purposes of accountability, contributing to learning from ongoing operations and devising remedies.

• In 1999, IFAD conducted a review of OE, including a survey of evaluation users, which led to a balanced approach to evaluation, one that sought to nurture the independence of mind of OE evaluators but also to fashion evaluation as a participatory and more effective learning process. These considerations led to: (i) new vision and mission statements for OE and an articulation of OE’s strategic objectives; and (ii) the development of new instruments of evaluation, including new processes and products.

• The Evaluation Committee did not have specific terms of reference until 1999, when the Committee proposed and the Executive Board approved TOR and Rules of Procedure in response to the desire expressed by several members to revitalize the Committee and make it more proactive. The Evaluation Committee and the Board reiterated that the Committee had been established with the specific purpose of assisting the Board in considering evaluation issues. They decided that the Committee would enhance its participation in several stages of the evaluation process; review OE’s strategy, work programme and selected reports; and fortify the Board’s understanding of OE’s work and the lessons learned in IFAD projects and programmes in pursuit of a global development strategy.

• The Consultation on the Sixth Replenishment of IFAD’s Resources in 2002 endorsed the value of independent evaluation and its contribution to learning, and the role of IFAD management in ensuring that lessons from evaluation contribute to learning within IFAD. It called for a formal IFAD evaluation policy to be developed and provided guidelines and specific provisions to ensure the independence of OE and strengthen the learning loop (see above as well as Annex I).