MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND COOPERATION

ANNOTATED INDEX FOR DRAFTING

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR OPERATIONAL EVALUATIONS

TEMPLATE

Read the instructions before filling out this template

February 2015

SECRETARY GENERAL FOR DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION

Evaluation for Development Policies and Knowledge Management Division

SECRETARY OF STATEFOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND

FOR IBEROAMERICA

INDEX

1. JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION 12. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 13. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION 14. EVALUATION QUESTIONS 25. METHODOLOGY 36. EVALUATION MANAGEMENT 47. SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES 68. EVALUATION PRINCIPLES, AUTHORSHIP AND PUBLICATION 109. PROFILE OF THE EVALUATION TEAM 1110. SUBMISSION OF BIDS, BUDGET AND BIDS’ APPRAISAL CRITERIA 12

APPENDIX I. PRELIMINARY LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS 15APPENDIX II. PRELIMINARY LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 16APPENDIX III. STYLE GUIDE FOR EVALUATION REPORTS

APPENDIX IV. DECLARATION OF ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

APPENDIX V. EVALUATION MATRIX MODEL 24

TITLE OF THE EVALUATION

1. JUSTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OBJECTIVES

Grounds for evaluation:

Evaluation objectives:

Intended use of the evaluation:

2. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

1

CHECKLIST

Are the reasons for carrying out the evaluation at this specific time clearly justified?

Is the number of objectives reasonable? (between 2-4 objectives is recommended)

Are they clear and specific enough, and do they appropriately reflect the levels of priority or relevance?

Is their scope feasible, based on the context, resources available and scope of the evaluation?

Is the use to be given to the evaluation findings specified? Who will be the main users of the evaluation?

CHECKLIST

Are the most important aspects of the evaluation object and its implementation until the time of the evaluation clearly described?

Is the particular context in which the intervention took place clearly described, addressing the relevant economic, social and political factors?

3. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION

Definition of the evaluation object:

Geographic scope:

Time frame:

Considerations regarding cross-cutting priorities:

Other relevant information to be included in Appendix

Appendix I should present a preliminary list of the main stakeholders involved in the evaluation process1.

Annex II should detail main reference documents related to the evaluation object as well as a set of links to websites containing updated information and publications relevant to the object of this evaluation2.

4. EVALUATION QUESTIONS

1.

2.

…

1 The different authorities comprised by the Reference Group for the evaluation will provide updated information to the evaluation team during phase one of the evaluation.2 The different authorities comprised by the Reference Group for the evaluation will provide the evaluation team with updated information during phase one of the evaluation.

2

CHECKLIST

Is the subject matter of the evaluation made clear?

Is the evaluation scope evaluation object, time frame, geographical coverage, etc. clearly identified?

Are the main stakeholders clearly identified and are all relevant groups covered?

Are the main documents linked to the evaluation object completely covered?

Is the evaluation scope consistent with the evaluation objectives and questions? Is it realistic and flexible given time and resources constraints?

In consultation with the different stakeholders and after a preliminary documentary review, the evaluation team will revise the evaluation questions and analyse the explicit interest in and feasibility of including them, so that they can be adjusted in a well-reasoned manner based on the information required, the evaluation deadlines and the resources earmarked for the evaluation. This adjustment will be included in the inception report, and should be validated by the management team.

5. METHODOLOGY

To articulate in a systematic and logical matter the comprehensive judgement of the evaluation object, the technical proposal shall revolve around an evaluation matrix3. The matrix is a tool for the operationalization of the evaluation questions, but it cannot be a substitute for the theoretical and methodological approach guiding the evaluation, which should be reflected clearly in its own section of the proposal. Furthermore, it is worth bearing in mind that methodology is not merely a list of techniques; rather, it involves a theoretical and epistemological stance, orienting the manner in which the evaluation is to be focused in order to meet the evaluation objectives, and setting out the form (specific techniques) in which the data is to be collected, classified, analysed and presented, with the aim of producing solid findings and evaluation deliverables meeting quality standards.

A preliminary evaluability analysis should be included, indicating which are the main a priori /enabling factors and limitations for satisfying the evaluation objectives meeting the planned aims for this evaluation, and answering the questions set forth.

It is the evaluation team’s responsibility to present in its proposal an appropriate theoretical and methodological framework for the purposes, objectives and utility of the

3Appendix V includes a model for the evaluation matrix.

3

CHECKLIST

Are the evaluation questions clear enough and do they cover the evaluation objectives?

Are they sufficient but not excessive in number, taking into account the time and resources allocated?

Do the questions have an evaluative approach, one that is not limited to clarifying points regarding the intervention or to filling in gaps in the existing data?

Is there consistency between the evaluation objectives, the questions, and the information needs of stakeholders?

Has the questions’ flexible role been specified?

evaluation (adjusted to the time and resources available for carrying this out), as well as a coherent approach that makes possible to operationalize in the evaluation matrix the evaluation’s different objectives, levels of analysis, questions and sub-questions. In this regard, it is important to clarify that this operationalization does not have to involve, in principle, any modification to the evaluation questions presented, but rather their development in subquestions, in line with the rest of the formulations of each of the columns in the evaluation matrix.

In its proposal, the evaluation team will ensure: the complementarity and diversity of methods and information sources, making clear the existing limitations and specifying how and to what point the analysis is going to include the cross-cutting approaches included in Spanish Cooperation’s Evaluation Policy (human rights, gender, cultural diversity and environmental sustainability).

These techniques should be consistent with the methodological approach chosen and appropriate for the nature of the information that is expected to be available in order to answer the evaluation’s different questions and subquestions. The proposal will justify in a specific and concrete manner the contribution of and need for each technique used in this evaluation, avoiding generic paragraphs on the technique and its characteristics. Likewise, it should avoid the mere juxtaposition or listing of basic techniques (e.g., interviews, surveys, focus groups) without specifying their details, relevance, and complementarity. As long as the information available so permits, quantitative and qualitative methods will be combined, which means the use of data collection techniques and specific analysis procedures for providing information that is sufficiently precise and robust and adequately explained and put into context..

Among the selection of techniques that the evaluation team considers opportune to propose, at least XXXX should be included (indicate the techniques appropriate for each case, e.g. review of the literature, interviews, discussion groups, case studies, surveys).

(Only when appropriate): Taking into account the scope, levels of analysis and evaluation questions and in order to adequately address the evaluation object, it is recommended that the evaluation team follow the methodological proposal of XXX.

6. EVALUATION MANAGEMENT

The evaluation will be carried out ensuring the participation of the main stakeholders involved in the evaluation object. The management structure of the evaluation will comprise:

(Only for joint evaluations) A Management Committee composed of XXX and ZZZ, with the following functions

4

(Only for individual evaluations) The management unit of the evaluation, in this case XXX, with the following functions:

- Provide broad guidance and direction in drafting ToR in consultation with the Reference Group, and give approval to the ToR.

- Appraise bidding proposals and select the evaluation team.- Maintain a close, efficient and regular liaison and dialogue with the evaluation

team and the Reference Group. - Provide technical advice and methodological oversight to the evaluation

process.- Carry out the evaluation quality control and supervise the accomplishment of

deadlines. - Validate the inception report and approve all the evaluation products in

consultation with the Reference Group.- Release the evaluation products and facilitate the dissemination of the

evaluation results.

- Coordinate filling out the management response document and promote use of the evaluation recommendations.

To enhance the appraisal process and introduce appropriate participation channels for the different stakeholders, a Reference Group will be created, including the participation of XXX (specify the principal stakeholders involved in the intervention evaluated)

The Reference Group’s main functions will be to:

Bring comments, suggestions and informative requirements to the Management Committee (whichever is appropriate) to draft the ToR.

Be closely involved in the evaluation process by providing comments and suggestions on the evaluation products (inception and final reports and other products) to the Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate).

Provide the evaluation team with all needed contacts and access to all the relevant information to carry out the evaluation.

Contribute to the dissemination of the evaluation results. Support the implementation of the evaluation recommendations.

The secretariat and coordination services for the Management Committee shall be the responsibility of XXX. This secretariat will be involved throughout the evaluation, serving as a liaison between the Reference Group and the management /unit (whichever is appropriate) and will provide support and advisory services to the latter during the entire process.

7. SCHEDULE AND DELIVERABLES

5

The time scheduled for this evaluation is XXX weeks since the formalization of the contract, and will follow the distribution of phases, tasks, deliverables and times indicated on the table below. The scheduled deadlines may be extended with the consent of the evaluation’s Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate), until the evaluation team’s deliverables are considered of sufficient quality.

During Phase I, the evaluation team will be accompanied by the evaluation’s Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate) in order to facilitate adjustment of the work and drafting of the preparatory report.

Unless expressly indicated otherwise, all deliverables shall be in (indicate language). All deliverables shall be presented in Word, to guarantee their subsequent publication under adequate conditions, in whatever formats are considered appropriate. The final report shall include photographs, maps, tables, infographics and other visual resources to make the report more user-friendly and easily understood.

Follow the style guide included as Appendix III. We recommend using the OECD DAC Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management as a means to clarify terms (e.g. instrument).

6

Phase Activities Duration

Phase I. Preparatory Activities and Desk Study

- Initial meeting between the evaluation team and the Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate), gathering of information and workplan adjustment

- Stakeholder analysis and identification of the evaluation key informants.

- Preliminary literature review and collection of new documentation at the office and on the ground.

- Description of the evaluation object- Preliminary mapping of interventions (only when

faced with a complex evaluation involving many interventions).

- Preliminary reconstruction of the intervention’s rationale

- Adjustment of the evaluation questions, methodology and work plan.

- Review of the documentation submitted by the evaluation team as part of the preparatory report by Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate) and by the Reference Group

- Adjustment of the deliverables by the evaluation team and their formal approval, when applicable.

X weeks

(a minimum of 2 additional

weeks are to be included for review,

adjustment and approval

of the inception

report)

Phase I deliverable: Inception Report

The report is to contain the final evaluation design, which must include: i) a description of the evaluation object; ii) the intervention’s rationale (reconstructed if it were not expressly formulated); iii) the conceptual analytical framework; iv) a methodological proposal, including a brief evaluability analysis (describing the limitations found or foreseen and justifying, when applicable, any changes with regard to the initial plan), specification of the techniques and data collection tools, and a detailed analysis plan; v) the updated work plan; and vi) a definitive evaluation matrix.

Phase II. Fieldwork

Application of data collection tools according to what was set forth in the Inception Report.

X weeks(this requires

prior approval of the

Inception Report)

Phase II deliverables: Presentations at the beginning and end of the fieldwork

7

Phase Activities Duration

The fieldwork will begin by briefing the Reference Group and the Management Committee/unit (whichever is appropriate). Other stakeholders may also be invited to this briefing. Once the fieldwork phase has finished, the evaluation team will make a presentation that will include the activities carried out, and it will present preliminary findings for discussion with the Management Committee/unit and with the Reference GroupPhase III. Analysis and interpretation of the information. Drafting and submission of the final report

- In-depth analysis and interpretation of the information collected.

- Drawing up of the first draft of the final report, which will include the corresponding appendices.

- Integration of observations and comments forwarded by the Management Committee/unit of the evaluation. The evaluation team will explain how these observations have been included in the document and will present, when applicable, the arguments for their non-consideration, preserving at all times the independence of the evaluation, in line with the Quality Standards for Development Evaluation of the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC).

- Drafting of the final report.- Submission of the final report.

XX weeks

(a minimum of 3 additional weeks are to be included for review, adjustment and approval of the final report)

Phase III deliverable: Final Report

This shall comprise the following documents:

- The final report itself (maximum 70 pages without appendices), which must respond to the evaluation objectives and answer the questions set forth. The conclusions and recommendations in the report must stem from the findings.

- A list of appendices, which will include, among other documents, the detailed methodology, the list of techniques and instruments applied, and a list of the principal sources of information.

- An executive summary, written in Spanish, English and in the language of the partner country if different from these two (maximum 5 pages in each language), the format and wording of which must be tailored for its dissemination and facilitating decision-making. It must include, as a minimum: an introduction to the object of the evaluation and to the methodology used and a summary of the principal findings, conclusions, lessons learned and recommendations. This executive summary is to be submitted once the final report has been formally approved.

8

Below is a guideline for the content structure of the final evaluation report. However, the index and definitive outline of the report shall be agreed upon between the Management Committee/unit and the evaluation team.

In any case, the findings and conclusions must be structured so that they respond clearly to the evaluation questions.

Lessons learned (either positive or negative) should include generalizations that go beyond the immediate intervention being evaluated, highlighting the wider-ranging relevance that the knowledge generated during the process might have. It is not a matter of repeating the conclusions with a different wording, and it must be understood that not all evaluations generate a large number of lessons learned. Lessons must only be drawn if they represent actual contributions to general knowledge. They must be solidly backed by the evaluation findings and conclusions. They may strengthen or complement commonly-accepted lessons, but they must not be a mere repetition of common knowledge. Lessons learned must be worded simply; they must specify the context from which they were drawn; they must explain the knowledge generated, identifying factors that explain why things happened in a certain way; and, with the necessary adaptations to each new context, they must be able to serve as guidelines for future interventions.

Recommendations should be limited in number, avoid generic wording, and state to whom they are addressed.

1. Introduction.

1.1. Structure of the Report.

1.2. Background, Scope and Evaluation objectives

1.3. Evaluation Questions and Levels of Analysis .

1.4. Theoretical and Methodological Framework.

1.5. Data Collection Tools and Analysis s.

1.6. Determining Factors and Limitations of the Evaluation.

2. Analysis and Interpretation of the Data (Findings).

3. Conclusions

4. Lessons Learned

5. Recommendations (Strategic and Operational).

Appendices

9

8. EVALUATION PRINCIPLES, AUTHORSHIP AND PUBLICATION

The evaluation shall follow the OECD DAC Quality Standards for Development Evaluation and Spanish Cooperation’s Evaluation Policy. Throughout the evaluation process, the evaluation team must respect the principles published in the Spanish Cooperation website.

Regarding authorship, without prejudice to recognition of the evaluation team’s moral rights, the (corresponding contracting entity) is to be responsible for designing the layout, printing and publishing the documents.

The contract shall comprise at least a presentation of the results of the evaluation in (the corresponding partner country) by the evaluation team. The evaluation team may also be required to participate in other activities involving presentation and delivery of results; in such cases, the costs that may be incurred by said activities are to be paid independently.

10

CHECKLIST

Have the principles to be met by the evaluation team, and which will guide their work, been specified?

Have the holders of the reports’ publication and distribution rights been clearly defined?

CHECKLIST

Are the different phases, tasks, deliverables and deadlines clearly established?

Are the deadlines set forth for the entire evaluation and for each of its phases realistic and sufficiently flexible?

Are the general characteristics—including the language(s) used—of the different deliverables described?

Has an initial outline been proposed for the final evaluation report?

9. PROFILE OF THE EVALUATION TEAM

The evaluation team is to comprise at least XXX people. It is recommended that there be an appropriate balance between men and women, and that it include local professionals.

The team coordinator must have a university degree and specialized training in evaluation or social research, and at least 3 years’ experience in carrying out evaluations.

XXX members of the team shall be required to have a university degree, preferably in development cooperation, evaluation, or public policies.

As a whole, the evaluation team must prove to have:

Wide-ranging knowledge of the socio-economic context and public policies of the country where the evaluation is being carried out.

Knowledge of Spanish Cooperation.

Specific knowledge of XXX (sectors, languages, etc. depending on the object of the evaluation)

Knowledge of cross-cutting approaches. This requirement will be adapted depending on the specific weight of the different approaches in each case.

The technical proposal is to include the tasks to be carried out and the period of time that each professional will dedicate to the evaluation, as well as their formal commitment to being a member of the evaluation team during the validity of the contract. Any change to the makeup of the evaluation team must be previously agreed upon with the Management Committee.

11

CHECKLIST

Is the minimum number of members in the evaluation team sufficient for conducting the exercise, given the existing time constraints and available resources?

Have all the requirements regarding training, professional experience (general and specific), cross-cutting approaches and languages been included?

Is there a clear distinction between requirements that need to be met and merits that will be appraised positively?

Is there a recommendation regarding an adequate balance between women and men in the team and the participation of local professionals?

10. SUBMISSION OF BIDS, BUDGET AND BIDS’ APPRAISAL CRITERIA

Bids are to be submitted in XXX before XXX (time) XXX (day).

The following documentation must be included:

Presentation of the company (if applicable) and the résumés of the evaluation team. It shall be stated that the presentation of documents accrediting the accuracy of this information may be required at any time.

Technical proposal, which is to include a description of the object to be evaluated, a methodological proposal including the operationalization of the evaluation matrix, and a work plan.

Financial proposal. This must be broken down into the different types of expenses (travel, accommodation, meals, fees, materials, etc.). In the case of fees, the tasks and fees of each member of the evaluation team are to be specified, indicating the amount per person and per day.

The maximum budget for this evaluation is XXX euros (excluding VAT). The price shall be paid in three instalments, following the validation of the corresponding deliverables (adjust on a case-by-case basis):

- After approval of the inception report (30%)

- After presentation of fieldwork conclusions (20%)

- After approval of the final report and reception of all the documentation (50%)

The criteria for bids’ appraisal are the following:

Financial proposal (30%):

Technical proposal (70%):

- Knowledge of the evaluation object (15 points)

- Methodological rigour and clarity of the proposal and its adaptation to the nature and purpose of the evaluation (30 points)

- Quality of the evaluation matrix (30 points)

- Feasibility of the work plan (12.5 points)

- Coverage of cross-cutting issues (12.5 points)

12

13

CHECKLIST

Are deadlines and modalities for submitting bids clearly detailed?

Is the specific documentation to be submitted in each case specified?

Are the available budget and applicable taxes clearly detailed?

Are the payment instalments, together with the associated deliverables, specified?

Is the minimum content that must be included in the technical proposal and in the financial proposal established?

Is there a general description of the criteria that will guide the appraisal, with a clear distinction between solvency requirements and aspects to be appraised?

Does the distribution of score percentages between technical and financial criteria ensure that the weight of the financial bid does not exceed 30%?

APPENDIX I. PRELIMINARY LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS

Below is, as a guideline only, the preliminary list of principal stakeholders involved in the evaluation: To be completed on a case-by-case basis

14

APPENDIX II. PRELIMINARY LIST OF REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

Some examples of reference documents are listed below, as well as a series of web links to updated information and relevant publications for the evaluation object. To be completed on a case-by-case basis

Spanish Cooperation Framework Documents:

- Fourth Master Plan for Spanish Cooperation (2013-2016)- Spanish Cooperation Evaluation Policy, 2013

Web links to information and reference publications regarding Spanish Cooperation:

- AECID

Web links to information and reference publications regarding the intervention under evaluation:

15

APPENDIX III: STYLE GUIDE FOR EVALUATION REPORTS

1. FORMATTING

All deliverables shall be submitted in Word format, with the following characteristics:

1. The text shall be presented in A4 format, in two columns, with single spacing (1.0), in Berthold Akzidenz font or failing that, Arial, size 10 (approximately 690 characters without spaces).

2. Paragraphs are to be separated by double spacing.

3. Reports are to include any tables and graphs necessary for proper understanding of the text. These tables, diagrams, graphs and images must be submitted separately and in their original formats, so that they may be edited when designing the layout of the texts.

4. Page margins are to remain in “normal” mode:

- Top and bottom: 2.5 cm

- Left and right: 3 cm

5. The font colour in the main body of the publication must be automatic (black), and the titles and outstanding subtitles are to be in blue, Pantone 312 (RGB 0, 175, 208).

6. Titles:

- The titles heading each chapter are to be in a larger font (12), in bold, and include the corresponding numbering. Example: 1. Introduction

- For the following level of title (first subtitle), the typography is to be in font 11 bold, and preceded by the corresponding numbering. Example 1.1. Background and Aims of the Evaluation

- For the third level, the font is to be 10, in italics and in blue. Example: 1.2.1. Analysis of the Effective Use of Resources

- For the next level, if there is one, the font is to be 10, in automatic colour (black) and in italics, without any numbering. Example: Implications for AECID

7. Numbered lists must be in Arabic numerals and with a space between the colon and the first numeral. There should be no extra spacing between the different items. Example:

“The principal assumptions underlying the CPF, as an instrument, are:

1. That the partner country defines its strategic priorities.

16

2. That Spanish Cooperation as a whole carries out a comparative advantage analysis as a basis for dialogue with the partner.

3. That, once approved, the CPF…”

8. Footnotes must always be at the bottom of the page to which they refer, and they must be sequential in all the chapters; i.e., each chapter will begin following the last number of the previous chapter.

9. Page numbering: page numbers are to be in the same font as the body of the text, only stating the number, in font size 10 black.

10. All reports must contain a text index, as well as an index of tables and graphs. In turn, tables and graphs must be accompanied by their number and the corresponding description, and they must be located over the image they accompany.

Example: Table 1. Phases of the Evaluation

The indices must have the following format:

- The general index must only go down to the second level.

- The index of tables and graphs must include the description of the numbered table or graph. Example: Graph 2: Planning Process.

- The font must be the same as that of the general body of the text, and the criteria set forth for the different levels in items 5 and 6 are to be applied.

2. STYLE

The style used must be simple and straightforward, avoiding metaphors, wordiness and double negatives, so that it is easy to read and not unnecessarily complicated.

3. QUOTES

All quotes must be placed between inverted commas, and cite the corresponding source. In the case of excerpts from interviews, the confidentiality of informants must be preserved, clearly specifying whether they are strictly personal opinions or quotes serving as examples of opinions shared by several stakeholders.

4. SPACING AND BOLDFACE

A larger space must be left between paragraphs expressing different ideas, and words identifying key ideas must be highlighted in boldface, in order to make the text more user-friendly. However, it is important to prevent visual overload by avoiding excessive use of italics and boldface.

5. ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS AND INITIALISMS

17

Abbreviations

To avoid impairing the comprehension and readability of a text, abbreviations should be used sparingly—mostly in notes, references, quotes and specialized texts.

Avoid the use of abbreviations that may be misleading or are not used outside the field of international development cooperation: MP for Master Plan (which could be mistaken for Member of Parliament), SC for Spanish Cooperation, etc.

Units of measurement are not abbreviations, but symbols; therefore, they must never be followed by a full stop: g; km; kW

Acronyms and Initialisms

It is very important to provide the full meaning of an acronym or initial on first reference in a text.

In English, acronyms vary. Their plurals are formed by adding a small “s”: an NGO, NGOs; a CPF, CPFs. Never use an apostrophe before this “s”.

Certain acronyms have become common nouns in the English language, and, therefore, are written in small case and pluralized like any other word, e.g. radar, radars.

When a prefix is attached to an acronym, it shall not be part of the acronym itself, but attached to it with a hyphen, e.g. anti-NATO.

In the event of needing to use an acronym corresponding to a term in another language, indicate its translation or meaning in the language of origin, without using italics: AECID (Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo).

6. USE OF CAPITALS

The following are capitalized:

• Entities, institutions, organizations, departments: Technical Cooperation Office, Emergency and Post-Conflict Department.

• Committees, commissions, working groups with a name of their own: Working Party on Aid Effectiveness and Quality.

• Conferences, seminars, fairs, etc. with a name of their own: World Day for Decent Work, Round Table on Indigenous Women.

• International years, days and weeks: World Cancer Day, Development Cooperation Week.

• Periodicals and collections with a name of their own: Journal of International Cooperation.

18

• All the significant words in the name or title of programmes, plans and projects: Masar Programme, Cultural Action Plan.

• Awards with a name of their own: Vicente Ferrer Award, Princess of Asturias Award.

• All principal words in the titles of works and documents: New Paths Out of Poverty, Free Trade in Spain.

• The names and surnames of persons.

• Forms of address: Ms, Mr, Prof.

• Specific jobs and positions: the Secretary-General for International Development Cooperation.

• Geopolitical areas, continents, countries, cities: Southern Cone, Horn of Africa, European Union, Federated States of Micronesia.

• Territorial subdivisions: Autonomous Community of La Rioja.

• Days of the week and months, but not seasons: the first Monday of August is my favourite day of summer.

• Languages and words indicating origin: Many Finns speak English and Swedish.

The following are not capitalized:

• Generic nouns: sectoral round tables, working groups, directors, accountability, management for development results, specific goal, strategic line, plans and strategies, etc.

7. NUMBERS

Each language has its own rules for writing numbers. In the case of translations, avoid replicating the original and follow, to the greatest possible extent, the rules of English.

Some general rules are set forth below.

Numbers spelled out:

• Numbers from one to nine (both included) are usually spelled out. However, avoid mixing numbers spelled out and numbers in digits in the same sentence, such as “Also present were 500 aid workers, 30 coordinators and four directors”. It is preferable to say “500 aid workers, 30 coordinators and 4 directors”.

• Fractions outside of mathematical contexts: “Three-fourths of its inhabitants are minors.”

Combination of words and digits:

• Units of millions, billions, or trillions: 1 trillion, 10 billion, 100 million.

19

• If the base is the numeral one thousand, do not combine digits and words: 432,000 inhabitants, not 432 thousand inhabitants.

Currencies:

• Whenever possible, amounts in currency should be stated in euros, regardless of whether other commonly-used currencies are also included in the evaluated intervention.

20

APPENDIX IV: DECLARATION OF ABSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Declaration of absence of conflict of interest (companies)

Mr/Ms .............................................................., with ID no. ……………………………, in representation of the company …………………, with Tax ID no. ……………………, contracted to evaluate .…………………………………………………………………… starting on the date .......... ..................... 201...

I hereby declare, under my responsibility, that the company I represent is free from any conflict of interest that could affect the impartiality of the evaluation, and, specifically:

That the company I represent shall carry out the evaluation in a fully independent manner, without any type of pressure or influence.

That the company I represent has not participated in a relevant manner in the design or implementation of the object of this evaluation.

That the company I represent shall clearly state the existence of beneficiaries or partners of the evaluated interventions with which it has engaged in professional relations during the two years prior to this evaluation.

That the company I represent shall not establish contractual relations with the principal managers of the evaluated intervention to carry out design or implementation activities directly linked to the evaluation object for a minimum period of six months after the end of the evaluation.

That the company I represent shall refuse to obtain any advantage, either financial or in kind, constituting an illegal practice or corruption, as an incentive or reward relating to the evaluation object.

That the company I represent shall immediately inform the Evaluation Division of any other situation that may constitute a conflict of interest or that could lead to a conflict of interest.

And in witness whereof for the appropriate purposes, I hereby issue and sign the

present declaration at ……………….., on ……… ……………………… 20...

Signature:

21

Declaration of absence of conflict of interest (individual)

Mr/Ms .............................................................., with ID no. ……………………………, acting in my own name and right and as an external evaluator participating in the evaluation of ………………………………………………………………

I hereby declare, under my responsibility that I am free from any conflict of interest of a financial nature or relating to political affinities or ties of family or friendship which could affect my impartial performance of this evaluation, and to this end I undertake to:

Inform the Evaluation and Knowledge Management Division of the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of any prior or subsequent personal or professional activity or relationship directly related to the evaluation object, so that the non-existence of conflict of interest that might bias the exercise of the evaluation may be verified.

Avoid introducing bias into the evaluation or altering its design, process or content as a result of having received an incentive, reward or advantage, either financial or in kind, or to create favourable conditions that may influence subsequent contracts, appointments or benefits.

Abstain during a minimum period of six months after the end of the evaluation from establishing contractual relations with the principal managers of the evaluated intervention that involve carrying out design or implementation activities directly linked to the evaluation object.

And in witness whereof for the appropriate purposes, I hereby issue and sign the

present declaration at ……………….., on ……… ……………………… 20...

Signature:

22

APPENDIX V. EVALUATION MATRIX MODEL

EVALUATION CRITERIA

(WHEN APPLICABLE)

EVALUATION QUESTIONS

SUBQUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS INDICATORS TECHNIQUES AND

SOURCES

23