1. 18 March 201419th meeting of the Evaluation Expert Committie 1 Thematic Working Group „Ex post Evaluation Guidelines” State of play Jela Tvrdonova

2. Contents  Where do we stand?  What is the planned structure of ex post guidelines?  What is the planned content of ex post guidelines?  What is in front of us?  What would we like to achieve today?  Interactive session with ExCo members 2

3. i Peer review Where do we stand? 3 18 Dec ‘13 14 Feb TWG kick-off meeting Drafting texts Screening Good Practices in assessing RD impacts Compiled text 2nd TWG meeting 18 Feb Revising text 10 Mar 1st Draft 18 Mar 19th ExCo Meeting

4. What is the planned structure of ex post guidelines? 4 Mainly Managing Authorities Introduces purpose, scope incl. legal requirements, and stakeholders Explains the process of the ex post evaluation Part I Mainly evaluators Discusses and explains intervention logic, evaluation questions, indicators, methods and data Part II Tool box Provides additional practical tools for ex post evaluation preparing, implementation and reporting. Part III For everyone Introduces ex post evaluation and its role in policy cycle Explains role of guidelines, usage, target groups and structure Introduction

5. 5 What is ex post evaluation Why we need specific guidlelines What are target groups and how they can use guidelines

6. Content of Part I 6 Purpose of the ex post evaluation Accountability Policy learning Steps to prepare high quality evaluation Scope of the ex post evaluation Legal framework Common and programme specific elements Process of the ex post evaluation Stakeholders and their role Key steps: planning, implementing disseminating Ex post evaluation of national rural network programmes Purpose, scope and process

7. Content of Part II Relevance Effectiveness and achievements Efficiency Impacts Success and failure factors 7 Focus of ex post evaluation

8. Intervention logic Evaluation questions Indicators Evaluation methods Data availability Content of Part II

9. Intervention logic  What do we mean by intervention logic  Intervention logic in RDP, various types, experiences  How shall the intervention logic be assessed  Two stages in assessment, vertical interpretation, key steps  Specificities with respect to TA, NRN  “Dos and don´ts” in relation to assessment of intervention logic 9

10. Evaluation questions  The role of evaluation questions in ex post evaluation  Judgment criteria and their use in evaluation  Common evaluation questions and judgment criteria - ex post evaluation of RDP 2007-2013  Links between common evaluation questions, judgment criteria and indicators  Development of programme specific evaluation questions and judgment criteria  How to use evaluation questions and judgment criteria in evaluation of RDPs  Specificities with respect TA, NRN 10

11. Indicators  The role of indicators in ex post evaluation  Definitions, role and types of indicators  Development and use of programme specific indicators  How to use indicators in evaluation of RDPs  Selection, reflecting policy objectives, interpretation,  coherence with intervention logic, links to evaluation questions, methods and data,  delivery considerations&resourcing  Specificities with respect TA,NRN 11

12. Methods  Methodological challenges for ex post evaluation –Programme effects and importance of counterfactual –Factors affecting evaluation results  Types of programme effects: –Direct –Indirect  Programme results and impacts  Evaluation design  Main evaluation methodologies, (qualitative, quantitative) and their selection for assessment of result and impacts  Quality assessment of evaluation  Specificities with respect TA,NRN 12

13. Data  From ideal to acceptable data availability  Major challenges in data management and collection  Using quantitative and qualitative data  Data necessary for assessmnt of: –Results –Impacts  Specificities with respect TA,NRN 13

14. Content of Part III (so far) New set of reviewed EQsOutline of ex post evaluation report Quality assessment grid for evaluation report based on the DG Agri assessment grid Quality criteria for the assessment of tendersTemplate for the identification of data gaps Outline of the technical specification of the Terms of Reference for the ex post evaluation Retro planning table for ex post evaluationGlossary of terms 14

15. i Peer review What is front of us? 15 18 Dec ‘13 14 Feb TWG kick-off meeting Drafting texts Screening Good Practices in assessing RD impacts Compiled text 2nd TWG meeting 18 Feb Revising text 10 Mar 1st Draft 18 Mar 19th ExCo Meeting 3rd TWG meeting 19 Mar Revising text 2nd Draft 16 Apr Feedback of MS 10 May Revising text Final Draft 6 June 17 June 20th ExCo Meeting Final draft delivered for approval 27 June DG Agri revision 20 Mar CEQ workshop

16. Interactive session with ExCo members What we would like to achieve today?  Discuss: –Structure and the content of the guidelines  Receive your feedback on: –Structure, content and terminology –Clarity, comprehensiveness (including overlaps and gaps), user friendliness of the guidelines’ text 16

17. Interactive session with ExCo members How do we work? ExCo members:  Work in small groups of 8 to 10 people,  Discuss the table of content and the text of guidelines, reflecting upon key questions;  Collect the main points of discussion in harvest sheets;  Report in plenary the main outcomes of the discussion; Evaluation Helpdesk:  Moderates discussion;  Collects findings and displays on the screen during the discussion. 17

18. Key questions  Does the content of the guidelines for ex post evaluation 2007-2013 addresses the needs of MA and evaluators?  What would you need in addition?  What should be described or explain rather briefly?  Which chapters, subchapters or paragraphs need to be elaborated more in detail?  Which practical tools should be included in the guidelines (toolbox section)? 18

19. 19 Thank you for your attention! Evaluation Helpdesk Chaussée Saint-Pierre 260 B-1040 Brussels Tel. +32 2 736 18 90 E-mail info@ruralevaluation.euinfo@ruralevaluation.eu http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/evaluation/en/