Author
Abstract
Evidence from impact evaluations of community-based nutrition interventions addressing the question of 'what works' to reduce linear growth retardation (stunting) is growing but consensus is mixed. Whilst the number of such impact evaluations is increasing, especially by non-governmental organisations, many studies fail to be publicised due to unclear and/or limited positive outcomes, denying experiences of lessons learnt. Those that are published need to be scrutinised to understand the methods used in deciding the validity of the reported outcomes, since impact evaluations in operation settings can suffer a number of limitations. The author uses as an example an integrated community-based non-randomised controlled impact evaluation to highlight some of the problems and issues encountered in carrying out impact evaluations in operational settings and how results need careful interpretation. In this Save the Children UK study, the only intervention to show a positive significant impact in reducing linear growth retardation (stunting) in children 6-36 months was water, sanitation and hygiene. A comprehensive analysis of the nature, reliability and robustness of the study was necessary to determine the validity of the results. This article looks at the important factors that may have been influential in these outcomes, including key issues generally faced in impact evaluations that threaten both the external and internal validity through bias, confounding, contamination and spillover effects as well as implementation problems encountered. The main issues in this evaluation were lack of randomisation and power, alongside implementation issues, resulting in potential confounding and bias possibly producing spurious results. Agencies involved in community-based impact evaluations should engage in robust methods and systematic reporting to create a stronger evidence base and as such be prepared to increase the transparency of their work.
Suggested Citation
Bridget Fenn, 2012.
"Impact evaluation in field settings: experience from a complex NGO programme in Ethiopia,"
Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 566-577, December.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jdevef:v:4:y:2012:i:4:p:566-577
DOI: 10.1080/19439342.2012.725085
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jdevef:v:4:y:2012:i:4:p:566-577. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJDE20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.