Develop and disseminate methodological guidance and tools for WASH evaluations and sustainability checks: In order to mainstream equity, scalability and sustainability in future WASH evaluations and to harmonise and improve the quality of WASH evaluations and sustainability checks, develop and disseminate methodological guidance, evaluation terms of reference templates and quality assurance checklists. In these documents, make equity, scalability and sustainability as separate, stand-alone evaluation criteria. Align the definition of these criteria with the ones provided in the future UNICEF global WASH strategy. Propose an indicative set of evaluation questions and a category of factors and performance indicators consistent with the global objectives proposed in the global strategy. Accompany them with clear definitions and rigorous methods for data collection and analysis in order to avoid over-reliance on self-reporting, improve data triangulation, reduce inconsistencies between reports and countries, and allow for cross-country comparison and global analyses. Regarding equity, make sure specific directions are given for assessing how each relevant population category (not only the poor and women) have been addressed along the different stages of the programme cycle, and to what extent the WASH programme effectively reduced inequities. Regarding scalability and sustainability, make sure specific directions are provided for assessing not only the actual upscaling and sustainability of the WASH interventions, but also the presence of underlying factors that support or threaten them. Disseminate this package of guidance and tools to all WASH and M&E sections at HQ, regional and country office levels.
Provide training and assistance to the WASH and M&E sections: Identify the capacity building needs and most appropriate training methods for WASH and M&E sections at HQ, regional and country office levels, including on theory of change, logframe, and programme evaluability. Disseminate evaluation related standards, rules and quality assurance procedures. Provide more technical support and quality assurance to the country offices conducting evaluations. Identify highly qualified WASH evaluators, build a roster or establish a pool under long-term agreement, to be regularly disseminated and updated.
Apply corporate procedures related to the quality assurance and to the utilisation of evaluation findings more systematically: Systematise the quality assurance of evaluation documents, including of terms of reference and inception reports, focussing on definition of evaluation criteria, robustness of methodological approaches and usefulness of recommendations. Ensure proper classification and upload of reports in the UNICEF evaluation and research database. Better monitor management responses and their actual implementation.
Make better use of and learn from past WASH evaluations: In collaboration with the WASH section in HQ, commission more thematic evaluation synthesis on WASH related topics that have already been evaluated in various countries and contexts. Extract findings and lessons learnt for instance on rural WASH, WASH in schools, and hygiene promotion programmes, and disseminate them within and outside of the organisation with the aim of improving the quality of WASH programming. Make sure that all evaluation reports are previously uploaded to the UNICEF Evaluation and Research Database in order to capture all available evidence. Consider including related studies, reviews, surveys and case studies, as well as similar documents published by other development organisations.
Commission evaluations on topics where knowledge gaps and UNICEF investments are the greatest: In integrated monitoring and evaluations plans, prioritise WASH evaluations in areas where UNICEF invests or is likely to a significant amount of funds and where knowledge gaps are the greatest, notably: capacity building; upstream work; engagement with the private sector, including in the areas of self-supply / manual drilling, water service management, spare part supply chain and water points mechanics, and sanitation marketing (or, more broadly, post-ODF reinforcement measures); hygiene promotion and in particular handwashing with soap, household water treatment, and water safety planning; ‘3 star approach’ for WASH in schools; mobile-to-web technologies and real-time monitoring systems.
Favour programme-wide, UNICEF-driven evaluations over donor-driven, project focussed evaluations: Give priority to programme-wide, UNICEF-driven evaluations over evaluations focussed on a single donor-funded project. This would have several benefits, including: get an overall picture of the performance of the WASH programme at a strategic time identified by UNICEF (for example before the development of the next country programme); assess the level of coherence and integration between its various components; make comparisons between the programme components; and better include cross-cutting issues such as equity, sustainability, scalability, but also relevance, efficiency (or value for money) and impact. Use the guidance and tools developed by the Evaluation Office.
Ensure the evaluability of WASH programmes: Take the next programmatic opportunity to revise the programme logframe, targets, M&E indicators and data collection methods to align them with the SDGs as well as with the definitions included in the future UNICEF global WASH strategy and the guidance developed by the Evaluation Office in collaboration with the WASH section in HQ. Carry out a survey to collect baseline data. Ensure that a special equity focus on the poorest, women, people with disabilities and other vulnerable and marginalised groups is included. Ensure that a focus on sustainability and scalability is also included. Adjust subsequent routine data collection process, methods and tools accordingly.
