Skip to main content

Table 2 Aspects of ‘appropriateness’ considered by different evaluation approaches

From: Defining, measuring and interpreting the appropriateness of humanitarian assistance

Approach Response is based on an impartial and comprehensive needs assessment Response caters for the vulnerabilities and capacities of different groups Response engages and ensures participation of affected communities Response meets the expressed needs of affected communities Response is culturally acceptable to the affected community Response uses the appropriate modality of intervention Other
Using OECD-DAC Criteria: ALNAP’s Evaluation of Humanitarian Action (EHA) and Real-Time Evaluations (RTE)   Response has appropriate choice and balance of interventions
Response is based on gender analysis
Using OECD-DAC Criteria: Interagency Health and Nutrition Evaluations in Humanitarian Crises (IHE)    Response shows timely adaptability to a changing context
Using OECD-DAC Criteria: Evaluating Humanitarian Innovation (EHI)     
Core Humanitarian Standard on Quality and Accountably (CHS)   Response builds on local capacities in affected communities
IASC: Operational Peer Review (OPR)        Response coordination mechanisms are appropriate, given the context
IASC: Inter-Agency Humanitarian Evaluations of Large-Scale System-Wide Emergencies (IAHE)       Services offered by the response are appropriate
UK’s Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) Rapid and Performance Reviews      Response objectives are appropriate to the context Response is appropriately-resourced
Modified community scorecard (CSC) methodology