Evaluations

Evaluations of Search for Common Ground programmes are, first and foremost, a learning tool for the organization. Our approach to evaluation is based on the belief that only through understanding more about how and why our work makes a difference can we learn and do better in the future.

As our evaluations are intended to be learning tools, it is important that they foster a spirit of inquiry and honesty, regardless of how challenging this may be to the organisation. Our evaluations typically seek to identify and analyse intended and unintended change, assess processes and partnerships and/or to examine durability, cost allocation and potential or actual impacts.

The SFCG evaluation approach is grounded in the guiding principles of our work. We believe that the process of evaluating programmes is a combination of both science and art, and wherever possible our evaluations utilise baseline and monitoring information. We ask our evaluators to work within and strengthen our own DME language. See our Evaluation Guidelines for full details.

SFCG evaluations are:

  • Empowering and committed to building capacity
  • Designed to lead to action
  • Honest and productively critical
  • Culturally sensitive
  • Participatory (to the greatest extent possible)
  • Evidence-based
  • In accordance with standards for ethical research

Search for Common Ground is committed to conducting programmatic evaluations of each office every two-years to maximize our effectiveness. In addition we often evaluate individual projects. The primary audience for the majority of our evaluations are SFCG staff. Yet we are certain that the donor community and other organizations in the conflict resolution field may benefit from them as well.

Evaluation by Country

Click on the links below to view a summary of that country's evaluations.

Sub-Saharan Africa

   

Asia

Europe/North America

Middle East/North Africa