ArticleEvaluation journal of Australasia2023
Reflections on COVID-19 and internal evaluation in a humanitarian non-profit.
Article in Evaluation journal of Australasia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article uses reflective practice and social interdependence theory to unpack the ways in which our practice as internal evaluators was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, using the development of a monitoring and evaluation framework as a case study. The reflections are separated into six stages: description, feelings, evaluation, analysis, conclusion and action plan. Initial reflections on the impact of COVID-19 drew out the negative effects of the pandemic and associated restrictions, which limited our ability to build rapport and stretched our capacity to balance work and home commitments. Deeper investigation revealed that the disaster pushed us to develop new ways of working that will augment and improve our future efforts. We foresee that these learnings will enable a future with greater ability to offer hybrid online/face-to-face collaborative opportunities that will enhance inclusion and active participation, thereby promoting monitoring and evaluation with greater collective ownership and relevance to a wider audience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.