GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Standards for Evaluation in the UN System

Standards for Evaluation in the UN System

Library
United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG)
2005

Summary

An effective evaluation process is an integral part of any project. But what are the key elements of a successful and sustainable evaluation approach? This document produced by the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) offers solid guidelines for evaluation planning, design, implementation and reporting. Fundamental requirements include: institution-wide support, clearly-defined and transparent responsibilities, appropriately qualified staff, and a constant commitment to the harmonisation and updating of methods used.

For evaluation findings to be reliable and meaningful, they must be grounded within an established institutional framework incorporating adequate resources, standardised procedures, and thorough reporting. Conducting the evaluation itself is only one part of an ongoing process requiring stakeholder backing and the highest professional and ethical standards from all involved.

The evaluation should include an appropriate institutional framework. There should be minimum standards for the management of the evaluation function as well as a minimum set of competencies and ethics among those involved in the evaluation:

  • UN organisations should have an adequate institutional framework and develop an evaluation policy to be regularly updated. They should submit evaluation plans for review and ensure appropriate evaluation follow-up mechanisms.
  • The Head of evaluation should ensure that the evaluation function is fully operational, that evaluation work is conducted according to the highest professional standards, evaluation guidelines are prepared and that the evaluation function is dynamic.
  • Persons engaged in designing, conducting and managing evaluation activities should possess core evaluation competencies. Evaluators should have a relevant educational background, qualification and training in evaluation, relevant professional work experience, technical knowledge of the methodology and managerial skills. They should be culturally sensitive, respectful and should protect the anonymity and confidentiality of informants.

The design, process and implementation of the evaluation should follow the set of norms outlined below, as should the final evaluation report:

  • The evaluation should provide relevant, timely, valid and reliable information. The subject, terms of reference, purpose and context of the evaluation should be clearly stated and evaluation objectives should be realistic and achievable. The evaluation design and methodologies should be rigorous. An evaluation should assess cost effectiveness and evaluation design should consider whether a human rights-based approach has been incorporated.
  • The relationship between the evaluator and the commissioner(s) of an evaluation must be characterised by mutual respect and trust. Stakeholders should be consulted at all stages of the evaluation. A peer review group may be particularly useful.
  • Evaluations should be conducted by well-qualified, gender-balanced and geographically diverse evaluation teams. They should be conducted in a professional and ethical manner.
  • The final evaluation report should be logically structured, evidence-based, relevant, accessible and comprehensible. Evaluation requires an explicit response by the governing authorities and management addressed by its recommendations.
  • The evaluation report should include an Executive Summary, complete and relevant annexes, and a clear description of the subject, context, purpose, objectives, scope, stakeholder participation, methodology and evaluation criteria. The contributions of all stakeholders should be clearly described. The report should indicate the extent to which gender issues, human rights considerations and ethical safeguards were incorporated.
  • Inputs, outputs, and outcomes should be measured. Analysis should include discussion of the relative contributions of stakeholders. Constraining and enabling factors should be identified. Recommendations and conclusions need to be evidence-based, relevant and realistic, and identify important problems or issues. Lessons should have relevance beyond the immediate subject.

Source

United Nations Evaluation Group, 2005, 'Standards for Evaluation in the UN System', UNEG, New York

Related Content

Lessons from stabilisation, statebuilding, and development programming in South Sudan
Helpdesk Report
2020
Doing research in fragile contexts
Literature Review
2019
Designing, Implementing and Evaluating Public Works Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2018
Indicators and Methods for Assessing Entrepreneurship Training Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2018

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".