In recent years, a range of new indices, benchmarking and scorecard tools-also known as 'indicators'-have been developed to influence public policy and to promote accountability. While subjected to important technical and political critiques, the policy impact of 'indicators' is often assumed yet rarely demonstrated. Suitable evaluative methods are in their infancy. This article adopts an innovative process tracing analysis to assess the policy impact of the Hunger And Nutrition Commitment Index (HANCI) in Bangladesh, Malawi, Nepal, Zambia and globally. We present a rare and empirically rich application of this systematic qualitative evaluative method. We further contribute to the theorisation of 'indicators' by positing a central role for equitable producer-user relations in mediating policy impact, and demonstrate that such relations can overcome significant political critiques on 'indicators'.

This paper provides an account of how a ‘causal–process–tracing theory of change’ can be very helpful for programme prediction, planning and evaluation. The paper uses case studies as running examples to illustrate how this type of detailed theory of change would be built.

No abstract

No abstract

IDS is a charitable company limited by guarantee and registered in England (No. 877338). The IDS programme on Strengthening Evidence-based Policy works across seven key themes. Each theme works with partner institutions to co-construct policy-relevant knowledge and engage in policy-influencing processes. This material has been developed under the Impact Innovation theme. The material has been funded by UK aid from the UK Government, however the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK Government's official policies. AG Level 2 Output ID: 348 1 Introduction and background This report relates to the second year of the Institute of Development Studies' (IDS) Accountable Grant (AG), a complex four-year grant, involving seven Outputs (six key policy themes and one policy response and evaluation output), 20 Sub-themes, 68 Activity Domains, and over 350 planned and supplemental Level 2 Outputs (or Policy Products). Level 2 Outputs include evidence reports, reviews, briefs, events, guidelines and other tools that aim to influence the policy process. The scale and diversity of activity under the grant, the dynamic policy environments in which it operates, the number of people and partners involved, together with the imperative to deliver within tight deadlines, highlights the need for a simple yet robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. First and foremost this system should provide the framework for analysing the level of achievement against a logical framework. The AG M&E system is built around Microsoft Dynamics Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software, and in Year 2 this system was further developed by David Beaven (Head of IDS Computer and Technical Services-CATS), Harvey Coates (Finance Department) and Tamlyn Munslow (Research Officer). Others involved in the development and use of the M&E system include James Sumberg (Grant Director), Georgina Powell-Stevens (Grant Coordinator), Kate Bingley (M&E Advisor), Fran Seballos (Partnerships Officer), Robin Coleman (Digital Communications Officer), Alison Norwood (Publishing Manager), Amy Thompson (Production Editor) and Nason Bimbe (Library/OpenDocs). 2 CRM-based M&E CRM software integrates contracts, contacts and process management functions and in Year 2 several notable improvements were made in automatically linking the Institute's budgeting and financial management software to the publication process. 2.1 Storing/retrieving information Several new fields were added to the Level 2 Output record. These include additional fields for budget codes, manuscript receipt dates, publication dates, download data in the first six months of publication, and corresponding URL links (Figure 2.1). Having access to these data for each Level 2 Output has proved valuable in tracking the delivery and production processes for the individual Policy Products.

No abstract

No abstract

The case of sex workers' economic rights in Ethiopia 4 Discussion and conclusion References Boxes Box 1.1 The Sexuality, Poverty and Law programme (SPLP)