Interviews do not M M M Reinterview if necessary. provide sufficient Redesign interview information schedule following pilot. Ensure interview notes fully reflect feedback. Seek alternative sources of information if possible. Breach of individuals’ L L H Use informed consent privacy or confidentiality procedures to ensure participants are no individual will be identified in reports Relationships damaged M H H Use of experienced through evaluation consultants should ensure process (e.g. through issues with potential for adverse findings that conflict can be handled may be disputed) sensitively. Triangulate findings to ensure accuracy. Communicate sensitivities to NZHC and Steering Group. Unanticipated delays M H L Use programme (e.g. getting responses management skills to to invitations from Head ensure programme to Teachers) affect timing timeline. Report to NZHC of field work interviews and Steering Group to and /or delivery of discuss alternative draft or final reports strategies if slippage unavoidable. Delays in feedback to L M L Effective communication of consultants from MESC, response deadlines. Timely DPs or NZ Aid reminders. Discuss Programme alternative strategies with NZHC and Steering if necessary. Impact of natural M H H Seek advice from NZHC disasters and Steering Group if completion of evaluation is compromised 5.4 Governance Arrangements The Evaluation will be conducted the supervision of an Evaluation Steering Group. The Evaluation Steering Group will be responsible for overall governance of the evaluation. The Evaluation Steering Group consists of the following people: Perenise Stowers, Development Programme Co-ordinator, Education, MFAT; Ingrid Van Principal Evaluation Manager, MFAT; Vena-Liz Upton, Senior Programme Manager, (Education) DFAT;
Interviews do not provide sufficient information M M M Reinterview if necessary. Redesign interview schedule following pilot. Ensure interview notes fully reflect feedback. Seek alternative sources of information if possible. Breach of individuals’ privacy or confidentiality L L H Use informed consent procedures to ensure participants are no individual will be identified in reports Relationships damaged through evaluation process (e.g. through adverse findings that may be disputed) M H H Use of experienced consultants should ensure issues with potential for conflict can be handled sensitively. Triangulate findings to ensure accuracy. Communicate sensitivities to NZHC and Steering Group. Unanticipated delays (e.g. getting responses to invitations from Head Teachers) affect timing of field work interviews and /or delivery of draft or final reports M H L Use programme management skills to ensure programme to timeline. Report to NZHC and Steering Group to discuss alternative strategies if slippage unavoidable. Delays in feedback to consultants from MESC, DPs or NZ Aid Programme L M L Effective communication of response deadlines. Timely reminders. Discuss alternative strategies with NZHC and Steering if necessary. Impact of natural disasters M H H Seek advice from NZHC and Steering Group if completion of evaluation is compromised 5.4 Governance Arrangements The Evaluation will be conducted the supervision of an Evaluation Steering Group. The Evaluation Steering Group will be responsible for overall governance of the evaluation. The Evaluation Steering Group consists of the following people: Perenise Stowers, Development Programme Co-ordinator, Education, MFAT; Ingrid Van Principal Evaluation Manager, MFAT; Vena-Liz Upton, Senior Programme Manager, (Education) DFAT;
samoa-school-fees-grant-scheme-evaluation.docx