final report has been submitted. This
another service which gives answers
is a paradoxical situation, because
wanted by those who pay for it.
often evaluators are not willing to do
Evaluations
the self-reflection and assessment
excessively on efficiency, effectiveness
as to whether an evaluation made
and measurable results on a short-
a difference. What they want their
term basis, rather than contributing
clients to pursue is too often not what
to
democratic,
they tend to do in their evaluation
and
participative
practice, stating that they have no
the
control over the use of evaluation
as central. ‘Speaking the truth to
findings. Only a small fraction of the
power’ may be naive and insufficient
evaluation stories initially selected for
if the inherent political nature of
the project were able to show a clear
evaluation is not recognised. This
connection between the evaluation
entails extending the focus of action
and the benefits for the people
of the evaluation to contribute to
derived from it. Generally, evaluators
public good, broadening its interest
do not go into detail on how their
towards
work can have a positive impact on
results, to unexpected consequences
people’s lives. They assume that their
of development interventions and
responsibility and tasks do not extend
investigating the causes of some
beyond
appropriate
social problems that programmes
methodology or method capable of
and policies aim to deal with. Giving
influencing decision-making.
evidence to the subjects of the political
selecting
the
tend
evaluation
to
concentrate
transformative purposes
community
medium
and
that holds
long-term
intervention entails ‘speaking truth In the global neoliberal context,
to the powerless’,6 considering them
evaluation runs the risk of becoming
as legitimate stakeholders in the
Introduction
29