Hello, AEA365 community, and happy Conference Week from Portland! The AEA staff have been working overtime to prepare for our biggest event of the year. Whether you will be joining us for the conference or not, you can keep up with our happenings via the AEA365 blog. See you around!
-Liz DiLuzio, Lead Curator
We, Thomas Scialfa, Alaa Issa, and Tom Clark, work with the Mercy Corps Global Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) team based in Louisiana, USA; Amman, Jordan; and Edinburgh, Scotland, respectively. We are excited to share the critical importance of using a Scope of Work (SoW)/Terms of Reference (TOR) checklist when commissioning or leading midterm or final evaluations. Using this tool is helping us substantially improve the quality and effectiveness of our evaluations.
Last year, Mercy Corps implemented nearly 300 programs in 47 countries, reaching nearly 30 million participants. These programs range from less than 12 months to 60 months in duration and cover dozens of sectors.
Given this, it is easy to understand why hundreds of formative and summative evaluations are conducted annually, both internally and externally, on Mercy Corps’ programs.
Ensuring quality, consistency, and manageability of evaluations is a major challenge. A strong Scope of Work (SOW) is crucial for successful evaluations, while a weak SOW often leads to subpar results. Inconsistencies between SOWs hinder comparison across programs and time.
Mercy Corps’ SoW checklist was developed with many of our MEL colleagues; it is a step-by-step guide designed to help write a comprehensive and precise SoW/TOR for conducting or commissioning final evaluations. It ensures that your evaluations answer the critical questions about your program, comply with essential rules and procedures, and are well-planned, budgeted, and executed. By following this checklist, you can ensure that your SoW is thorough, well-structured, and concise.
One key benefit of the SoW/TOR checklist is its clear, organized framework for evaluations. Its three sections organize checklist elements typically found in a SoW, but it can be reordered to suit user needs.
- The Program Overview section summarizes the program, including its name, sector, donor information, and location. It also provides background information, such as the problems addressed, assumptions, dependencies, and key interventions. This ensures your evaluation is grounded in the program’s context and objectives.
- The Evaluation Details section outlines the evaluation’s purpose and objectives, intended audience, adherence to work plans, and any unexpected deliverables. It also covers the impact of staffing, management, and procurement on implementation and spending, providing a comprehensive assessment of the program’s performance.
- The Deliverables section specifies required reports and datasets, including the Inception Report, Final Report, and Data Analysis Plan. It also outlines the evaluation timeline, from the kick-off meeting to the final report submission, ensuring an organized and efficient process.
In conclusion, using a SoW checklist is essential for commissioning and/or leading high-quality midterm and final evaluations. It provides a clear and organized framework for your evaluation, ensuring that it is comprehensive, well-structured, and concise. By following this checklist, you can improve the quality and effectiveness of your evaluations, ultimately leading to better evaluation products
We hope that you will join us during our professional development workshop at the annual conference of the American Evaluation Association, October 21-26, 2024 in Portland, Oregon.
Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.