ItemDeveloping a visibility strategy for the Tanzania Evaluation Association: Scoping Report(CLEAR-AA, 2020) CLEAR-AA; TANEA ItemAfrican Monitoring and Evaluation Systems: Exploratory Case Studies(CLEAR-AA, 2012-09) Porter, Stephen; Djidjoho, Aristide N.; Houinsa, David G; Amoatey, Charles; Machuka, Samson; Okumu, Boscow W.; Muteti, Francis; Simwa, Vivienne C.A; Himbara, David; Momar, A. Ndiaye; Boubacar, A.W; Latib, Salim; Goldman, Ian; Byamugisha, Albert; Asingwire, NarathiusThis publication is comprised of six monitoring and evaluation (M&E) case studies from Benin, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda. Together these case studies formed the basis of discussion at an African M&E Systems Workshop held in March 2012, in Pretoria, South Africa. While the individual case studies detail learning from specific African country contexts, the accompanying synthesis paper entitled The Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa captures some of the broader trends and issues that are emerging across the cases. So why African M&E case studies? Although prior studies do exist, the African governance terrain is changing rapidly; governments are responding to increased demand for results and accountability from citizens, and M&E systems are evolving to generate information that can be used by civil society, the executive, and the legislature. As a pan-African community of practitioners, substantive case studies are needed to provide an evidence base for learning from each other’s experience. The case study exercise itself grew out of cooperation at Ministerial level between Burundi and South Africa. Minister Chabane subsequently tasked the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) in the South African Presidency, to undertake a learning event on M&E systems across a range of African countries. In partnership with the Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results (CLEAR) housed at the Graduate School of Public and Development Management at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, the DPME hosted a conference to which four senior officials from each of the six participating countries were invited. Using open dialogue techniques, delegates were able to reflect on the case studies, analyse M&E within their own country in terms of what was working well, and identify potential areas for learning and improvement. The event concluded with a call for further exchange opportunities, and a deepening and widening of cross-country learning. The case studies should not be read as definitive diagnostics on the state of M&E in the countries concerned, but rather as first steps in building an evidence-based approach to M&E across the continent. More importantly, they represent a commitment from government practitioners to reflect and learn from the practice of M&E, and establish local solutions to M&E challenges confronting African countries ItemEmbracing Evaluative Thinking for Better Outcomes: Four NGO Case Studies(2017) CLEAR-AA; InterActionThis study would not exist without the contributions of many people. First, we must acknowledge the input of the international NGO participants at the Sub-Saharan Africa Practitioner Workshop on Evaluative Thinking and Evaluation Use, which was organized and facilitated by the African Evaluation Association (AfrEA), the Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results for Anglophone Africa (CLEAR-AA), and InterAction in Accra, Ghana, December 10-12, 2013. ItemeVALUation Matters: Building supply and demand for evaluation in Africa(IDEV, 2018) CLEAR-AA; IDEV (Independent Development Evaluation African Development Bank)Evaluation plays a critical role in the effective implementation of good governance structures in Africa, in promoting accountability, learning, development effectiveness, and sustained and rapid economic growth. The lack of an evaluation culture hinders good governance based on evidence-informed decision-making. But creating an evaluation culture requires more than enacting a policy or even having an evaluation unit - there must be buy-in from government ministries and agencies, to parliaments, to the grassroots level. There must be a steady supply of high quality evaluations, and the demand for these evaluations in order to ensure their use. When decision-makers want to use evidence from monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems to assist them in making choices, then there can be said to be a demand for M&E. On the supply side, when there is sufficient national capacity to supply M&E personnel / practitioners and information, and those in research and academia are improving on M&E methodologies, the same can be said of adequate national M&E supply.