impact evaluation for financial inclusion- cgap
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/10/2019 Impact Evaluation for Financial Inclusion- CGAP
1/2
12/24/2014 Impact Evaluation for Financial Inclusion | CGAP
http://www.cgap.org/news/impact-evaluation-financial-inclusion 1/2
Impact Evaluation for FinancialInclusion
23 January 2013
Connecting Funders and Researchers on Impact Evaluation for Financial
Inclusion
CGAP and the UK Department for International Development (DFID) convened over
70 people including financial sector specialists and evaluation staff of regional
development banks, development finance institutions, and foundations as well as
researchers for a workshop on impact evaluation for financial inclusion on 10-11
January 2013 in London.
The mounting call for rigorous evaluation in development overall combined the
debates about the impact of microfinance, have placed funders of financial inclusion
under special pressure. Funders are also committed to improving the evidence
base. The challenge is: how to find appropriate approaches to impact evaluation
that are rigorous yet also pragmatic and cost-effective. The workshop was an
opportunity to start tackling this challenge. In welcoming the participants, Alexia
Latortue, Deputy CEO of CGAP, shared the aspiration that progress on impact
research and the growing evidence base be matched by a better understanding of
how to act on evidence for better decision-making.
The first day was dedicated to discussing different research methods for impact
evaluation. Philip Davies, Deputy Director of 3ie, set the stage by stressing the
importance of asking the right questions before launching into research design.
Nathanael Goldberg, Policy Director at Innovations for Poverty Action, presented
approaches to conducting randomized controlled evaluations, while Alexis Diamond,
Results Measurement Specialist at IFC, gave an overview of quantitative non-experimental methods (quasi experiments). Syed Hashemi, Founder and Director of
the BRAC Development Institute, outlined qualitative research methods. The
researchers highlighted the advantages and limitations of each method.
Participants strongly suggested that using mixed methods combining qualitative
and quantitative methods is best suited for impact studies that enable them to
learn not only what change happened following their interventions, but alsowhy.
The second day was designed with an interactive format for the participants to
discuss specific questions and challenges in using impact evaluations to inform
program and policy decisions. Discussions ranged from how much money should be
allocated to evaluation as a percentage of overall program budgets to how to incite
http://-/?- -
8/10/2019 Impact Evaluation for Financial Inclusion- CGAP
2/2
12/24/2014 Impact Evaluation for Financial Inclusion | CGAP
http://www.cgap.org/news/impact-evaluation-financial-inclusion 2/2
Topics: Impact | Funder Effectiveness
private sector partners to share data needed for sound evaluation. Special sessions
on specific aspects of financial inclusion work, including mobile banking and
interventions at the meso- and macro-level, also advanced challenges and ideas for
smart evaluation.
Stefan Dercon, Chief Economist at DFID, asked participants to reflect on the way
impact evaluation is used today to inform policy: While evidence has alwaysmattered, it is the way we produce and use it that has changed.
http://www.cgap.org/topics/impacthttp://www.cgap.org/topics/funder-effectiveness