Rolling Five-Year Development Evaluation Work Plan 2014-2015 - 2018-2019

June 2014

List of Abbreviations

Executive Summary

The present Rolling Five-Year Development Evaluation Work Plan (hereafter, the Plan) identifies corporate evaluations scheduled for FY 2014-2015 to FY 2018-2019, with a focus on FY 2014-2015. The Plan also includes, for information, a list of Branch-led evaluations planned for FY 2014-2015.

In 2013, the Development Evaluation Division conducted an in-depth review of DFATD's development evaluation universe ^{Footnote 1} with the intention of ensuring full evaluation coverage of the Department's direct program spending over 5 years and this plan has been developed to achieve that requirement.

Planned Evaluation Work - FY 2014-2015

In FY 2014-2015, the Development Evaluation Division will initiate and/or complete the following evaluations:

• Countries of concentration and regional programs: Country Program Evaluations of Mozambique and Tanzania; Ethiopia and Ghana; Indonesia; Bangladesh, as well as a program evaluation of the Canada Investment Fund for Africa.
• Countries of Modest Presence: An evaluation of programming in 8 countries with modest Canadian development assistance programs in the Americas, Asia and the Middle East.^{Footnote 2}
• Fragile States: Country Program Evaluations of West Bank and Gaza, Afghanistan, Haiti and possibly South Sudan.
• Global Issues and Development (MFM): Review of the development effectiveness of the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United Nations Population Fund and the International Organisation of la Francophonie.
• Partnerships for Development Innovation (PDI): An evaluation of the Partners for Development Program.
• Corporate evaluations: A meta-evaluation^{Footnote 3} of Branch-led evaluations.
• Horizontal Evaluations: A formative evaluation of Canada's contribution to the Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Initiative.

Equally important, the Development Evaluation Division will:

• Finalise the review and update of the current methodology for Country Program Evaluations, including the development of necessary tools and guides;
• Participate in the Multilateral Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) Technical Working Group and Steering Committee and continue to provide technical inputs to both the MOPAN and DAC EvalNet networks on a potential amalgamation of their approaches to assessing of multilateral organisations;
• Produce a report on the state of performance measurement;
• Produce the second Report on Lessons from Development Evaluations;
• Jointly with the former DFAIT Evaluation Division commission a neutral assessment of the evaluation function, as required by the 2009 Treasury Board Evaluation Policy;
• Complete the Development Evaluation Quality Assurance Tools and Guides Suite intended to facilitate the execution of Branch-led evaluations by DFATD staff;
• Support Branch-led evaluation strategic planning and knowledge management;
• Provide technical advice on evaluation matters to the Open Agency Programming Process (APP) implementation and accompanying e-RoadMap;
• Serve as Secretariat for DFATD's Development Evaluation Committee.

Resources

If fully executed, this work plan would require an operations and management (O&M) budget of $2.7 million for FY 2014-2015, and a salary budget of $1.8 million for 19 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

This work plan puts forward the completion of 18 corporate evaluations in 2014-2015, 8 of which were initiated in 2013-2014.

Experience indicates that slippage will occur in an evaluation work plan executed in diverse low income and fragile states, due to a combination of unpredictable security and scheduling constraints, and contracting delays. For this reason, the practice instituted in 2013-14 of over-planning the number of evaluations to mitigate slippage and ensure full execution of allocated budget will be continued this year.

1.0 Background

1.1 Introduction

The scope and content of this Plan is consistent with the requirements of the 2006 Financial Administration Act (FAA) and the 2009 Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Evaluation. The Plan proposes an approach that will position DFATD's Development Evaluation Division to achieve 100% evaluation coverage of development grants and contributions and direct program spending as required by the FAA and the 2009 TB Policy on Evaluation, while contributing to the Department's learning and decision making needs. ^{Footnote 4}

1.2 Context

There is strong demand, from both expert constituencies and the general public, for credible assessment of the results of international aid expenditure. Responding to this fundamental accountability requirement will remain a central purpose of the development evaluation function.

At the same time, there is an increasing commitment to innovation in DFATD's development programming - a purposeful effort to design, pilot and scale up the most effective and cost efficient ways of pursuing poverty reduction. In this environment, program planners and managers need timely feedback on what works well, in what circumstances and why. Providing such learning is the second and increasingly important aim of both corporate and Branch-led development evaluation at DFATD.

The Speech from the Throne in October 2013 highlighted the Government's commitment to helping the world's neediest by partnering with the private sector to create economic growth in the developing world. It also emphasized the achievement of concrete results and ensuring that foreign aid continues to be "focused, effective and accountable". Canada's leadership in the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women's and Children's Health is an example of efforts being made to show global leadership on results achievement, effectiveness and accountability.

The Government of Canada continues to encourage departments to use evaluation to strengthen programs. In line with the Financial Administration Act (FAA), the 2009 Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation requires that 100% of direct program spending be evaluated over a five-year cycle. The TB Policy on Evaluation also encourages the use of flexible evaluation approaches guided by risk, scale, and scope. It requires departments to develop a strategically focused evaluation plan that is founded on an assessment of evaluation risk, departmental priorities, and government priorities.

1.3 International Year of Evaluation - 2015

EvalPartners, a global movement to strengthen national evaluation capacities, has designated 2015 as the International Year of Evaluation as a way of advocating for evaluation and evidence-based policy making at international, regional, national and local levels. There will be a thematic focus on inclusion and innovation in evaluation during this year.

The UN General Assembly is expected to endorse 2015 as the International Year of Evaluation, with a primary aim of promoting enabling environments and capacity for evaluation in all member countries. This has particular implications for the Development Evaluation Division, as there will be an expectation of increased engagement with developing country evaluation functions for program evaluations in their countries.

In 2005, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness articulated a consensus on reforming donor and developing country approaches to delivering and using aid for better development results. The 2008 Accra Agenda for Action further built on the Paris Declaration by promoting policies and actions that improve transparency and accountability in strengthening aid effectiveness. Efforts to promote the Paris Declaration principles within the field of evaluation have continued with increasing numbers of country-led and joint evaluations. Other global trends include enhancing local evaluative capacities; promoting peer review and knowledge exchange; ensuring the identification of good practices, and adhering to recognized international standards in evaluation.

2.0 DFATD's Development Evaluation Function

2.1 DFATD Context

In July 2013, a decision was made to amalgamate the Canadian International Development Agency and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The new Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD) was created. The two evaluation units that existed previously in the separate departments will be maintained in the coming year, with broadly unchanged focus and scope of work. One unit will focus on evaluating foreign affairs and trade-related initiatives and the other on development programming.

The Development Evaluation Division is part of the new Strategic Policy Branch of DFATD. It leads corporate evaluations, and provides Canadians, Parliamentarians, Ministers, central agencies, partners, beneficiaries and DFATD's management with credible, neutral, and evidence-based assessments of the relevance and performance of the Department's development strategies, programs and projects.

DFATD has a Development Evaluation Committee comprised of six external experts and five DFATD senior executives (including the Deputy Minister of International Development, who chairs the committee). This Committee acts as an advisory body to the Deputy Minister on development evaluation activities.

Program branches fund and manage their own project level evaluations, for which the Development Evaluation Division provides technical advice and quality assurance services. These evaluations typically cover investments below the sub program level of the Program Alignment Architecture, and because they are intended to benefit development partners, are funded from the Aid Budget, as per DFATD's Terms and Conditions for International Development Assistance.

Both corporate and branch-led evaluations contract external consultants for some aspects of evaluation execution. In the case of corporate evaluation, it is for data gathering and analysis, primarily in the field, while overall design, final reports and recommendations are often prepared in house.

The current Plan covers both corporate and branch-led evaluations, including some multi-donor initiatives, with respective responsibilities outlined below.

2.2 Responsibilities of the Development Evaluation Division

The Development Evaluation Division is responsible for:

• developing, in coordination with the respective Branches, the Rolling Five-Year Development Evaluation Plan, which includes corporate and branch-led evaluations;
• ensuring that corporate development evaluations are conducted in a neutral, rigorous and cost-effective manner;
• developing and implementing a dissemination approach to ensure that evaluative knowledge is broadly disseminated across the Department to promote organizational learning;
• instituting a systematic approach to track the implementation of recommendations in management responses and action plans;
• providing technical advice, training/coaching and quality assurance services to Branches in support of the evaluations they and/or their partners are managing;
• ensuring that the Department has continuous access to external development evaluation consultants via contractual mechanisms, in collaboration with the Contracting Policy and Support Services Division;
• reviewing and providing advice on the accountability and performance provisions to be included in Cabinet documents (memoranda to Cabinet, Treasury Board Submissions);
• forging and maintaining beneficial strategic alliances with key stakeholders, inside and outside the Department; and,
• supporting the Development Evaluation Committee to ensure effective governance and oversight.

2.3 Responsibilities of Program Branches

Program branches are responsible for:

• preparing annual multiyear evaluation work plans for inclusion in DFATD's Rolling Five-Year Development Evaluation Work Plan;
• ensuring that sufficient performance information is available to effectively support evaluations;
• providing comments on corporate evaluation deliverables (e.g. work plans, reports) and preparing management responses and action plans;
• managing their evaluations as set out in their multiyear evaluation work plans; accessing evaluation tools, technical advice, training/coaching and quality assurance services from the Development Evaluation Division in support of their evaluations; implementing approved management responses and/or action plans; and,
• disseminating evaluation results for learning and follow-up actions and to ensure transparency.

3.0 Developing the Work Plan

3.1 Key considerations

Several considerations were taken into account when developing DFATD's development evaluation work plan for FY 2014-2015:

• the FAA requirement that "every department conduct a review every five years of the relevance and effectiveness of each ongoing program for which it is responsible"; and the 2009 TB Policy on Evaluation requirement to achieve 100% evaluation coverage of direct program spending, also over 5 years;
• the results of the recent Review of DFATD's Country Program Evaluation Approach ^{Footnote 5};
• the emphasis on the use of evaluation findings for program improvement and decision making, in line with recent Treasury Board guidance; and
• the need to ensure that the approaches and methodologies used in conducting DFATD evaluations take into account the evolving thinking on best practices in development evaluation, including the recent Treasury Board guidance on theory-based evaluation and assessing program resource utilization when evaluating federal programs.

As in 2013-14, the number of planned evaluations has been set at a slightly higher level than allocated budget resources would actually support, understanding that slippage can be expected in actual execution for a variety of reasons including security and scheduling constraints in target countries, and some unpredictability in contracting processes.

3.2 Coverage, Sequencing and Risk Analysis

In 2012/2013, the Development Evaluation Division conducted an in-depth review of DFATD's evaluation universe in order to ensure full evaluation coverage of the Department's direct developmental program spending over 5 years; a plan was developed to meet the 100% coverage requirement by 2017-2018.

At the same time, an examination of sequencing of evaluations was undertaken so that their usefulness and value would be optimized. As recommended by the Treasury Board Secretariat, sequencing was informed by considering a combination of needs and evaluation risks.^{Footnote 6} This assessment remains valid and continues to be reviewed during regular discussions with programme branches.

The proposed sequencing of evaluations in the current five-year cycle is outlined in Table 1. A description of the Department's evaluation universe can be found in Table 5.

3.3 Evaluations carried over from 2013-2014

Some evaluations are implemented over multiple fiscal years, sometimes due to scale and complexity, or because they are initiated later in a given fiscal year and can only be completed in the next. In addition to the planned evaluations described in Section 4 of this document, in 2014-2015 the Development Evaluation Division will complete several evaluations carried over from 2013-2014. These include:

4.0 Planned Evaluations for FY 2014-2015

4.1 Countries of Focus and Modest Presence

The main emphasis will be on DFATD's 20 countries of focus, where at least 80% of bilateral resources are spent. In FY 2014-2015, the Development Evaluation Division will follow through on two pilot "country cluster evaluations" - Mozambique/Tanzania and Ethiopia/Ghana - where there are sectoral and programmatic similarities. This approach will allow thematic review and comparison of lessons within clusters - health and food security, respectively.

The Indonesia country program evaluation and the evaluation of the Canada Investment Fund for Africa, initiated in 2012-2013, will be completed in 2014-2015 and a country program evaluation for Bangladesh will be initiated.

In 2014-2015, a cluster evaluation of several modest presence countries in the Americas, the Middle East and Asia will examine thematic programming on children and youth, sustainable economic growth, and food security^{Footnote 8}.

4.2 Fragile States

The evaluations of Afghanistan and Haiti, both initiated in 2012-2013, will be completed by mid-2014-2015. An evaluation of West Bank and Gaza was initiated late in 2013-2014 and will also be completed in 2014-2015. The feasibility of updating the joint donor evaluation of South Sudan will also be examined, with a potential focus on lessons and guidance for future programming in this fragile context, as well as a case study of MNCH programming to support the corporate MNCH evaluation. Among others, these evaluations will examine the extent to which fragile state programming aligns with the OECD/DAC Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations. These principles direct international interventions in fragile states towards governance and state building for long-term stability.

4.3 Global Issues and Development

The Global Issues and Development Branch finances and supports a large number of international institutions and funds. The Development Evaluation Division has applied the DAC EvalNet methodology to assess the development effectiveness of these organizations using their own performance reporting and evaluation data. The approach, intended to be done jointly among donors, allows for coverage of a high number of institutions over a short period, at reasonable cost to each donor and with the leverage to affect needed changes.

Canada is also playing an active role in another donor network that measures the development effectiveness of multilateral organizations - the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN). An examination of the extent to which the DAC EvalNet and MOPAN methodologies are complementary was carried out in FY 2013-14. Consideration of greater coordination, and possible integration, of the two assessment approaches will be pursued in 2014-15, with a significant role being played by the Development Evaluation Division.

In FY 2014-15, the Development Evaluation Division will finalise reviews of the Inter-American Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and initiate reviews of the United Nations Population Fund and the International Organisation of la Francophonie.

4.4 Partnerships for Development Innovation

The new Partnerships for Development Innovation (PDI) Branch (formerly the Partnerships with Canadians Branch) is currently responsible for two sub-programs of DFATD's PAA - Partners for Development and Global Citizens; the former accounts for about 90% of PDI spending. Since 2010 it has operated through calls for proposals.

Given that the Chief Audit Executive will examine the proposal call process itself in 2014, the Development Evaluation Division will evaluate the relevance and effectiveness of the results from those calls since 2010. Any evidence of innovative approaches and/or partnerships that may have been achieved during that time will be captured. This is intended to inform the renewed mandate of this Branch to foster innovative approaches to poverty reduction.

4.5 Process Evaluations

In 2014-2015, a meta-evaluation will be initiated to assess the quality of Branch-led evaluations. As well, the annual report on the State of Performance Measurement will be prepared.

4.6 Horizontal Evaluations

Following the completion of an Evaluability Assessment of Canada's Contribution to the Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Initiative in 2013-14, a formative evaluation of this Initiative is planned for FY 2014-2015. This evaluation will assess progress to date and provide key lessons and recommendations to support evidence-based decision-making on policy, expenditure management and program improvement.

Following a Portfolio Review of DFATD's Natural Resource Governance Projects, which formed part of the evaluation of the Government of Canada's Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy for the Canadian International Extractive Sector, a thematic evaluation of projects related to natural resource governance and the extractive industry will be considered, beginning with an evaluability assessment.

The Development Evaluation Division will participate in the interdepartmental evaluation of the Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative. This six-year initiative (2007/08 to 2012/13) received $139 million in funding from several Government of Canada departments and $28 million from the Gates Fundation. DFATD's contribution amounted to nearly $60 million. The evaluation will be led by Health Canada/Public Health Agency in collaboration with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Industry Canada and DFATD.

5.0 Additional Development Evaluation Division Activities for FY 2014-2015

5.1 Support to Branch-led Evaluations

The Development Evaluation Division will:

• Complete the Evaluation Quality Assurance Tools and Guides Suite;
• Develop guidelines to support Branch-led evaluation strategic planning and knowledge management;
• Provide technical advice on evaluation matters to the Open Agency Programming Process (APP) Implementation and accompanying e-RoadMap;
• Ensure that the new Department Programming Process includes up-to-date tools and guides for evaluation;
• Continue to provide technical advice and quality assurance services to Branch staff;
• Ensure that the Department has continuous access to external development evaluation consultants via contractual mechanisms in collaboration with the Contracting Policy and Support Services Division;
• Establish a central database to house all branch-led evaluations along with an automated retrieval system; and
• Ensure the inclusion of program branches' evaluation plans in the Rolling Five-Year Development Evaluation Work Plan.

5.2 Review of Country Program Evaluation Methodology

In 2013-2014, the Development Evaluation Division completed a review of the current methodology for country program evaluations. This review was endorsed by the Development Evaluation Committee in January 2014. The next step will be the preparation of renewed guidance and tools, to be completed by December 2014.

5.3 Commitments in Treasury Board Submissions

Over the past few years there have been several evaluation commitments made in Treasury Board Submissions to obtain approval for major initiatives. Four of the 19 evaluation commitments made to Treasury Board Secretariat between 2006-2007 and 2013-2014 are the responsibility of the Development Evaluation Division. The remaining evaluation commitments are the responsibility of the program branches. Table 4 presents a list of these evaluation commitments.

5.4 Optimizing the Use and Knowledge Benefits from Evaluations

Development evaluations at DFATD create a source of credible and neutral information, which feed into strategic reviews, renewals of terms and conditions, Treasury Board submissions, the Report on Plans and Priorities, the Departmental Performance Reports, and Memoranda to Cabinet. They also inform decision making on investments and program improvement.

While DFATD has traditionally benefited from an evaluative culture, there remains a need to optimize the use of findings, recommendations and lessons learned from evaluations. The Development Evaluation Division will review its approach to the use and dissemination of evaluation knowledge and will finalise a guide that seeks to increase the use of evaluation findings, recommendations and lessons learned, both within and outside the Department.

The second Report on Lessons Learned from Development Evaluations will be produced in order to ensure the wide dissemination of evaluation knowledge in 2014. This report communicates key lessons derived from corporate evaluations and presents one-page summaries of the evaluations reviewed.

In 2014-2015, the Development Evaluation Division will:

• Revise the Approach to the Dissemination of Evaluation Knowledge to include an emphasis on the use of evaluation findings;
• Finalise a guide to support the use of evaluation knowledge;
• Produce the second Lessons from Development Evaluation report (formerly called "CIDA Learns");
• Promote evaluation knowledge and lessons learned via Evaluation Learning Cafés;
• Provide guidance to Branches on the preparation of evaluation summaries;
• Use DFATD's knowledge networks to share findings and lessons from evaluations; and,
• Prepare for events to be conducted during 2015, which is the International Year of Evaluation.

5.5 Neutral Assessment of DFATD evaluation functions

In 2014-15, a neutral assessment of DFATD's evaluation functions will be carried out as part of the Department's compliance with the TB Policy on Evaluation. This assessment will examine the level of compliance with the Policy, the use of evaluation evidence, and the extent of coherence between decentralized and corporate development evaluation.

5.6 Corporate Engagement

Support and input will be provided to corporate-level initiatives, such as: the Departmental Performance Report; the Report on Plans and Priorities; and Management Accountability Framework. The DFATD Program Committee will be engaged in periodic review of the status of implementation of corporate evaluation recommendations.

5.7 Strategic Alliances and Country Capacity

Constructive working relationships with the Foreign Affairs and Trade Evaluation Division, and the Treasury Board Secretariat's Centre of Excellence for Evaluation will be maintained. More active participation in the Canadian Evaluation Society and the possibility of introducing their accredited evaluator designation as an asset qualification in RFP processes will be pursued.

Internationally, the Development Evaluation Division will focus its engagement with the Network on Development Evaluation of the Development Assistance Committee (of the OECD) in order to remain abreast of emerging thinking in the field of international development evaluation. It will also play an active role in the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) as a member of its Technical Working Group and Steering Committee, with a view to promoting the uptake of an integrated methodology to assess the development effectiveness of multilateral organizations.

On-going relationships with the Nordic + Evaluation Group and 3ie (a network on impact evaluation) will continue. The EvalPartners initiative to build evaluation capacity in developing countries will be monitored, and the Development Evaluation Division will seek approval for a modest contribution to a multi donor initiative focused on a targeted sub-set of those countries.

Ongoing engagement with these communities of practice is important to maintain and strengthen Canadian leadership in development evaluation, and to ensure continuing exposure to emerging good practices and approaches.

6.0 Program Branches' Evaluation Plans for FY 2014-2015

Program branches conduct evaluations to improve the effectiveness of projects and programs that benefit developing countries.

The following section describes the evaluation activities planned by the branches during the FY 2014-2015 period. Branch-led activities complement the Development Evaluation Division's work by providing performance assessments, monitoring data, and other relevant information.

6.1 Geographic Program Branches - Branch-led Evaluations Planned for FY 2014-2015

Monitoring, evaluation and reporting is ongoing in the various geographic programs branches. The list below provides a provisional plan for FY 2014-2015.

6.2 Partnerships for Development Innovation- Branch-led Evaluations Planned for FY 2014-2015

The Partnerships for Development Innovation (PDI) Branch maintains a Rolling Four-Year Evaluation Plan. The 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 Plan focuses on the implementation of two types of Branch-led evaluations: specific project evaluations on an exceptional basis (for example, in the case of Treasury Board requirements) and group thematic evaluations.

Group thematic evaluations comparatively assess several projects related to the same development theme or addressing the same development problem. Since these evaluations are not limited to a single project, organization or country, their findings are applicable across country contexts, they interest a broad range of development actors, and they provide greater benefit to people in developing countries because they produce broad learning and recommendations applicable to many situations and contexts.

For FY 2014-2015, Partnerships for Development Innovation plans to execute the following group thematic evaluations in programming areas of priority for the Department:

• Community Based Interventions in Maternal, Newborn and Child Health;
• Children and Youth Protection; and,
• Partnerships with Extractive Industries

In FY 2014-2015, PDI also plans to initiate the process to undertake selected group thematic evaluations of projects chosen for funding in December 2011 through the "Under $2 Million" Call for Proposals. In the context of Calls for Proposals, this comparative approach to evaluation will enable PDI to identify and promote the most successful practices applied by partners to deliver development results on the ground, and apply these findings to selection mechanisms and criteria for future programming.

The programming areas that will be assessed through the group thematic evaluations of the "Under $2 Million" Call for Proposals will reflect the thematic focus of funding approved under the entire Call focusing on strategic sub-themes that offer promising opportunities for learning and knowledge sharing.

Partnerships for Development Innovation will also execute the following specific project performance evaluations in FY 2014-2015 principally to meet specific evaluation commitments to Treasury Board:

• Formative evaluation of the Aga Khan Foundation Canada's Partnership for Advancing Human Development in Africa and Asia Initiative;
• Summative evaluation of the Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF) Phase 1;
• Summative evaluation of the Canadian Francophonie Scholarship Program;
• Formative evaluation of the Statistics Canada Strengthening National Statistics Systems Initiative; and
• Evaluation of the Canada Fund for African Climate Resilience.

6.3 Global Issues and Development Branch (MFM) - Branch-led Evaluations Planned for FY 2014-2015

Global Issues and Development Branch (MFM) engages in three distinct types of development and humanitarian programming and therefore engages in three distinct approaches to evaluations.

Long-term Institutional Support

Canada, both as a member of the governing board and through direct consultation with the institution, participates actively alongside other donors in evaluation processes, including reviewing evaluations and providing direction on recommendations. Examples of evaluations being completed by our partners in 2014-2015 include:

• Role of UNDP in supporting national achievement of the MDGs, UNDP;
• Child protection: Combating Violence against Children, UNICEF;
• Evaluation of World Bank Group Support to Health Financing in Improving Health System Performance, World Bank.

Overarching assessments of key partners, such as through the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) and multi-donor Development Effectiveness Reviews, provide further opportunities for dialogue and comparison.

Global Initiatives

Each global initiative supported by DFATD has a strong monitoring and reporting component. These evaluations generally take the form of a mid-term and final evaluation. In most cases, the evaluation is conducted by the partner. DFATD, and other donors, frequently play a role in the process but the relationship is supportive rather than prescriptive. In a few instances, DFATD conducts the evaluation. Examples of evaluations of global initiatives taking place in 2014-2015 supported by the Branch include:

• Improving Nutrition through Homestead Food Protection, Helen Keller International;
• Catalytic Initiative/Integrated Health Systems Strengthening, UNICEF.

International Humanitarian Assistance

Although DFATD supports evaluations conducted by our humanitarian partners on their programming, DFATD also supports system-wide learning, to determine better how the humanitarian response system as a whole is meeting identified needs. The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), conducts evaluations to promote transparency, accountability and learning through systematic and objective judgments about the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and impact of humanitarian interventions.

DFATD also supports specific learning and evaluation mechanisms, such as the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP). In almost all instances, DFATD's NGO partners include monitoring and evaluation as part of the project - this pertains to both emergency response and complex humanitarian initiatives. In some cases, DFATD conducts an evaluation. In addition to real-time evaluations following a crisis, examples of evaluations being undertaken in 2014-2015 include:

• Inter-agency evaluation of the Large Scale response for Typhoon, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs;
• Joint Summary Evaluation Report of the FAO/WFP-led Global Food Security Cluster, World Food Programme.

The list below provides a provisional plan for FY 2014-2015 evaluations for which the Global Issues and Development Branch is directly involved.

7.0 Budget

In 2012-13 there was under execution of actual vs. planned budget for evaluation. This arose from, among other reasons, postponed field missions (security and embassy constraints) and contracting delays.

The 2013-14 evaluation work plan was therefore purposely constructed at a level of activity 20% greater than the expected budget, on the reasoning that some level of slippage would inevitably occur across a portfolio of evaluations in diverse low income and fragile contexts.

As a result, the overall level of realized evaluation activity in 2013-14 increased over the previous year, and planned budgets for salary, and operations and maintenance (O&M) were fully executed. It is proposed to carry on with this modest over planning in 2014-15.

A total of 12 corporate development evaluations were underway or completed in 2013-14. A total of 18 evaluations are planned for 2014/15, with 8 ongoing and 10 new evaluations.

7.1 Non-Salary O&M

A budget of $2.7 million is planned for FY 2014-2015 in order to implement ongoing and proposed new evaluations. This covers the costs of engaging external professional expertise, and other non-salary costs including staff travel and translation.

7.2 Salary Budget

For 2014-15 the Development Evaluation Division has a planned salary budget of $1.8 million and a staff complement of 19 full-time equivalents (FTEs): the Director, 17 evaluators and 1 administrative support staff.

Select Organization: Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada (incl. EDC)
Identify PAA used: 2013-2014
Spending Source Used (include Year): Main Estimates (2014-15)
Identify total organizational spending ($) (e.g. Total Budget Main Estimates, Total Expenditures of the Public Accounts, etc.): $3,039,696,666.00

Evaluation Commitments to TBS ^{Footnote 18}

The table below presents specific evaluation commitments indicated in the TB Submissions that were approved between FY 2006-2007 and FY 2013-2014. It excludes evaluation commitments already completed.

Note: ^* PB: Program Branch ED: Development Evaluation Division

Corporate/Department Wide

TB Submission (abridged title): 1. Muskoka Initiative
Lead^*: ED
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Thematic evaluation to be undertaken in 2015.
A review of the initiative to be undertaken in 2014.

Country Programs

TB Submission (abridged title): 1. Afghanistan Program
Lead^*: ED
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2009-2010^{Footnote 19} (postponed to FY 2012-2013).

TB Submission (abridged title): 2. Burkina-Faso
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by 2015.

TB Submission (abridged title): 3. Canada Investment Fund for Africa
Lead^*: ED
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2013-2014.

TB Submission (abridged title): 4. Pakistan (Debt Relief)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2013-2014.

TB Submission (abridged title): 5. Tanzania (Education Sector)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Previously planned meta-evaluation will likely be replaced by a review in FY 2015-2016.

TB Submission (abridged title): 6. Palestinian Authority's Justice Sector
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Project delayed; evaluation timelines to be re-determined once re-scoping approved.

TB Submission (abridged title): 7. Support to Aga Khan Foundation Canada's initiative entitled 'Regional Maternal, Newborn and Children Health Centers and Comprehensive Health Program in Afghanistan'.
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Formative evaluation to be completed by FY 2012-2013; Initiated in FY 2014/2015.
Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2014-2015.

Global Issues and Development

TB Submission (abridged title): 1. United Nation's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) to support the Central Emergency Response Fund
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Evaluations planned and managed through the OCHA

TB Submission (abridged title): 2. GAVI Alliance -Global Partnership for Education; Global Partnership for Education (GPE) formerly "Education for All Fast Track Initiative"
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Evaluations to be planned and managed through the:

1. GAVI Evaluation Advisory Committee
2. GPE Monitoring and Evaluation Steering Committee.

TB Submission (abridged title): 3. World Food Programme
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Development Effectiveness Review completed in 2012.
MOPAN review of WFP completed in 2013-2014. The Review of the World Food Programme's humanitarian programme also to be covered by the nextHumanitarian Assistance program evaluation (2017-2018).

TB Submission (abridged title): 4. East Africa Drought
Lead^*: ED
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: To be also covered by the nextHumanitarian Assistance program evaluation (2017-2018).

TB Submission (abridged title): 5. Global Malaria Program (WHO)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be undertaken in FY 2015-2016.

TB Submission (abridged title): 6. Scaling-up Nutrition through Integrated Life Saving Interventions (UNICEF/Helen Keller International (HKI))
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation (UNICEF component) in progress (FY 2013-2014).
Summative evaluation (HKI component) to be undertaken in FY 2014-2015.

TB Submission (abridged title): 7. Micronutrient Initiative (2014/15 - 2018-19)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Formative evaluation (MI-led) to be undertaken in 2016-2017
Summative evaluation to be undertaken in 2018-2019

TB Submission (abridged title): 8. Global Agricultural and Food Security
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Partner organizations responsible for implementing each element of the Program are also responsible for planning, resourcing, and conducting evaluations of that programming.

TB Submission (abridged title): 9. UNDP Long Term Institutional Support (2012/13-2013-14)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: UNDP Development Effectiveness Review completed 2012-2013. A subsequent UNDP Development Effectiveness Review to be undertaken in 2016-2017.

TB Submission (abridged title): 10. Funding to implement Canada's final Copenhagen Accord near-term financing commitments
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Evaluations planned and managed through the UNDP and ADB

Partnerships for Development Innovation

TB Submission (abridged title): 1. Volunteer Cooperation Program
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Formative evaluation was completed in 2012. Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2013-2014.

TB Submission (abridged title): 2. Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (Phase 1)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2014-2015.

TB Submission (abridged title): 3. Support to Aga Khan Foundation Canada's initiatives entitled 'Partnership for Advancing Human Development in Africa and Asia'
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Formative evaluation to be completed by FY 2014-2015. Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2015-2016.

TB Submission (abridged title): 4. Canadian International Institution for extractive industries Development
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Institutional assessment to be completed by FY 2015-2016. Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2017-2018.

TB Submission (abridged title): 5. Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (Phase 2)
Lead^*: PB
Evaluation Commitments made to TBS and TB Conditions: Summative evaluation to be completed by FY 2017-2018.

Establishing the Evaluation Universe

In FY 2012-2013, the Development Evaluation Division revised its evaluation universe to take into consideration the results of the Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP). The number of units in the evaluation universe was based on DFATD's program activity architecture (PAA, FY 2013-2014), the Performance Measurement Frameworks approved by Treasury Board Secretariat, and the commitments made in Treasury Board Submissions.

Based on these considerations and following extensive consultation across the Department at that time, including with the former Multilateral and Global Programs Branch (MGPB) and Geographic Programs Branch (GPB), the Development Evaluation Division arrived at a tentative Evaluation universe of 50 units for coverage during the following five (5) year period. The 2014/15 - 2018/19 work plan includes:

5 evaluation units related to Fragile Countries and Crisis-Affected Communities

• Afghanistan
• Haiti
• South Sudan
• West Bank/Gaza
• Humanitarian Assistance

8 evaluation units related to Low-Income Countries

• Bangladesh
• Ghana & Ethiopia
• Mali
• Pakistan
• Mozambique & Tanzania
• Senegal
• Vietnam
• Other Low-Income Country Assistance Programs (Benin, Burkina Faso, DR Congo)

8 evaluation units related to Middle-Income Countries

• Bolivia
• Caribbean Regional
• Colombia
• Honduras
• Indonesia
• Peru
• Ukraine
• Other Middle-Income Country Assistance Programs (Cuba, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Philippines, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Sri Lanka)

1 evaluation unit related to Regional Programs

• Inter-American Program, Pan-African Regional Program, Southeast Asia Regional Program

23 evaluation units related to Global Engagement and Strategic Policy ^{Footnote 20}

• Asian Development Bank (AsDB)
• African Development Bank (AfDB)
• Caribbean Development Bank (CDB)
• Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
• World Bank Group (WBG)
• International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
• United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
• United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
• United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
• World Health Organisation (WHO
• Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)
• United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN Women)
• United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
• United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF)
• World Food Programme (WFP)
• Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM)
• Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative (GAVI)
• Global Environmental Facility (GEF)
• Canadian Foodgrains Bank
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
• Commonwealth Institutions
• Institutions of the Francophonie
• Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)

2 evaluation units related to Canadian Engagement

• Partners for Development
• Global Citizens

3 specific commitments made in Treasury Board submissions

• Muskoka Thematic Evaluation
• Review of the Muskoka Initiative
• Canada Investment Fund for Africa (CIFA)

Through consultation with the Treasury Board Secretariat, it was determined that there is no obligation to evaluate sunsetting programs.

In planning and revising the sequence of evaluations, the Development Evaluation Division consults widely across the Department to ensure that user and corporate needs are being met and that ongoing programs are being evaluated every five years as per Treasury Board Secretariat requirements. Further, the Development Evaluation Division ensures that the timing of evaluations feed into the key decision making processes, such as the replenishment of multilateral funds.