Background: The Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) movement calls for evaluation theories and approaches grounded in African philosophies and indigenous knowledge systems. Although African proverbs contain evaluative wisdom, few methodologies systematically transform this wisdom into evaluation philosophy, frameworks and approaches. Objectives: This article introduces the Extract–Learn–Orient (ELO) methodology, a culturally grounded process for identifying, interpreting and synthesising evaluative and philosophical insights embedded in indigenous proverbs. Method: The ELO emerged from reflection on developing the Swahili evaluation approach. Drawing on indigenous research methodologies, qualitative content analysis, philosophical hermeneutics and interpretive evaluation theory, it comprises three phases: (1) Extract, identifying culturally legitimate proverbs; (2) Learn, applying Interpretive Evaluation Mapping to generate evaluative insights; and (3) Orient, synthesising these insights into evaluation philosophy and practical guidance. Results: Applying ELO to Swahili proverbs generated insights into inquiry, evidence, participation, accountability, experiential knowledge, ethical judgement and contextual sensitivity. These were synthesised into ontological, epistemological, axiological and methodological beliefs, together with culturally grounded understandings of evaluation’s meaning, rationale and purpose, demonstrating that indigenous proverbs are sources of evaluative reasoning that can inform evaluation theory and practice. Conclusion: The ELO provides a systematic and transferable methodology for transforming indigenous proverbial wisdom into evaluation knowledge, strengthening the methodological foundations of Made in Africa Evaluation. Contribution: The ELO offers a replicable pathway through which indigenous communities can develop culturally grounded evaluation philosophies, frameworks and approaches, advancing methodological innovation, epistemic justice and the decolonisation of evaluation.
Background: Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) has emerged as a response to the dominance of Euro-Western epistemologies in evaluation theory and practice, particularly within African development contexts shaped by externally driven funding and accountability regimes. While MAE has played a critical role in challenging epistemic injustice and advancing decolonial critique, much of the discourse remains anchored in oppositional framings of the Global North and Global South. Objectives: This article argues that the future of Africa-rooted evaluation lies not only in resisting Western dominance but also in advancing a constructive, principled, and globally engaged practice of evaluation from Africa. It contends that a continued fixation on binaries risks limiting MAE’s transformative potential. Method: Drawing on MAE scholarship, African Evaluation Principles, Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS), and relational African philosophies such as ubuntu and ukama, the article critically examines prevailing decolonial arguments and proposes a shift towards an African relational evaluation orientation. Results: The article advances three interrelated principles – integrity, inclusion, and reciprocity – as foundational to evaluation from Africa. These principles reposition accountability, ethics, participation, and benefit-sharing at the centre of evaluation practice, while remaining open to global knowledge exchange. Conclusion: By moving beyond ‘Made in Africa’ as a defensive identity marker, the article offers a forward-looking framework for evaluation from Africa. Contribution: This article contributes substantively to global evaluation theory and practice, grounded in African values yet connected to the world.
Background: The Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) framework has emerged as one of the most significant intellectual and institutional responses to the dominance of Western evaluation paradigms on the African continent, yet the question of what is distinctively ‘African’ about it remains undertheorised and contested in the evaluation literature. Objectives: This article interrogates what is distinctively ‘African’ about the MAE by analysing the philosophical, epistemological, methodological, institutional and political dimensions through which MAE asserts its African identity, tracing its evolution from its inception in 1999 through to the most current scholarly contributions of 2025–2026. Method: A qualitative interpretive literature review oriented towards critical synthesis was conducted, drawing on systematic narrative synthesis and thematic analysis and guided throughout by a critical postcolonial meta-theoretical lens. Results: Made in Africa Evaluation’s Africanness is grounded in Ubuntu philosophy, African indigenous knowledge systems, the African relational and Afrocentric paradigms, communal ways of knowing, and the institutional architecture of African Evaluation Association and the African Peer Review Mechanism. Unresolved tensions persist between universalist and contextualist epistemologies, theory and practice, and local ownership and global relevance. Conclusion: Made in Africa Evaluation constitutes an assertion of Africa’s right and intellectual capacity to define, conduct and own evaluation on its own terms, enriching both African evaluation practice and the global evaluation enterprise. Contribution: This article provides the first comprehensive, multi-dimensional framework synthesising the philosophical, epistemological, methodological, institutional and political dimensions of MAE’s African identity, advancing the theoretical foundations of the MAE discourse.
Background: Qualitative approaches are widely applied across disciplines, yet their role in programme evaluation in Africa, where evidence is critical for accountability and learning, remains underexplored. Objectives: This study examines how trustworthiness strategies are reported in peer-reviewed qualitative evaluation studies in African contexts, and how reporting varies across methodological orientations, thematic focus areas and Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS) use. Method: We conducted a scoping review of 83 Web of Science (WoS)-indexed evaluation studies in African contexts, applying directed content analysis to map trustworthiness-reporting strategies and multiple correspondence analysis to examine variation. Results: Findings reveal a consistent pattern: the WoS-indexed evaluation studies are most transparent about structurally visible methodological elements, notably thick description and data collection, while trustworthiness strategies that demonstrate deeper analytic or relational accountability are systematically under-reported. The corpus shows that strategies requiring greater methodological accountability, such as analytic details, reflexivity and sampling, are rarely comprehensive. Participant engagement strategies (e.g. prolonged engagement) and analytic mechanisms (e.g. audit trails) are particularly underused. Multiple correspondence analysis identified three clusters: (1) comprehensive reporting in health and standalone qualitative studies, (2) partial engagement strategies in CAQDAS-supported studies and (3) limited reporting in agriculture and environment evaluations. Conclusion: This study contributes empirical grounding to qualitative evaluation practice in Africa, showing that reporting is structured by sectoral context and technological adoption more than by methodological orientation, with strategies critical to interpretive accountability remaining under-reported. Contribution: Addressing the gaps requires capacity building that engages evaluators, journals, professional bodies and funders with the epistemological commitments of qualitative inquiry, not merely its reporting conventions.
This Table of Contents reflects the print compilation of peer-reviewed articles published in the journal. Each article listed was originally published online under the journal’s open access model and remains individually accessible and citable. This compilation has been created solely for print distribution, reference, and archival purposes. No new research content is introduced. The publisher affirms that all articles included in this compilation have undergone the journal’s standard editorial and peer-review processes.
This Table of Contents reflects the print compilation of peer-reviewed articles published in the journal. Each article listed was originally published online under the journal’s open access model and remains individually accessible and citable. This compilation has been created solely for print distribution, reference, and archival purposes. No new research content is introduced. The publisher affirms that all articles included in this compilation have undergone the journal’s standard editorial and peer-review processes.
Background: While Monitoring and Evaluation (ME) plays a vital role in improving performance, many systems rely heavily on donor-centric and Western-oriented models that do not reflect Africa’s ecosystem dynamics. Objectives: To critically examine the experiences of African thought leaders involved in the Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) initiative and integrate these reflections with conceptual insights to guide the ongoing refinement of MAE. Method: The study employed a scoping literature review and qualitative interviews with five purposively selected evaluation experts. This approach enabled a comprehensive analysis of the MAE initiative and the real-world experiences of ME practitioners. Results: Major challenges include limited professional training, a weak evaluation culture and perceptions of ME as donor-driven, which are compounded by political interference, inadequate funding and corruption. Four strategic pathways were identified: fostering an evaluation culture, promoting multi-stakeholder collaboration, embedding governance principles and ensuring flexibility to reflect Africa’s diverse contexts and development realities. Conclusion: The study underscores the importance of developing Afrocentric ME systems that are technically robust, contextually grounded, independent and resistant to political interference. However, its findings may be constrained by sampling bias due to the small participant pool. Future research should expand on this initiative using the Delphi technique and creating a checklist of key issues for broader quantitative or regional qualitative testing. Contribution: The study contributes to the growing body of work advocating for an Afrocentric ME system by capturing the lived experiences of African thought leaders behind the MAE initiative.
Background: Building capacity in knowledge translation is necessary to bridge the gap between research and practice, but evaluation of knowledge translation training initiatives is limited. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), stakeholders of a public health project participated in such training that involved completing two massive open online courses (MOOCs) autonomously, with biweekly coaching by a trainer and feedback through email. Objectives: This qualitative study aims to report on their experience with distance training, including implementation barriers and facilitators and the effect on their practice. Method: Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with trainees 8 months post-training. The evaluation used three levels of Kirkpatrick’s model – reactions, learning, behaviour change – and the TIPEC framework to identify barriers to implementation. Results: Participants faced significant technological obstacles. Nevertheless, they described a satisfying and collaborative learning experience. The training topic was deemed relevant. The biweekly coaching they received was appreciated, though most did not consider it essential. Most trainees had put their learning into practice by the time of the evaluation. Conclusion: In a context of limited resources, MOOC-based knowledge translation training met the needs of these professionals spread out across a vast territory and was deemed effective from an individual standpoint. This study confirms the importance of tailoring the training to learners’ professional contexts in the DRC. Contribution: This study assessed the effectiveness of MOOC-based learning in a little-described context of a French-speaking low- and middle-income country. It contributes to identifying the added value of this training method.
Background: Monitoring and evaluation (ME) is not only a managerial tool and apolitical process, but it is also a political tool serving political objectives. In Western Uganda, government and non-governmental conservation organisations monitor and evaluate Community-Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) projects in protected areas (PAs) and adjacent communities. However, politics of ME influences how performance evidence is generated and used. Objectives: This article explores the inevitable politics of ME and their implications for evidence generation and use. Method: The research was conducted in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Lake Mburo National Park and the Rwenzori Mountains National Park in Western Uganda and neighbouring communities. It involved Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) and three non-governmental conservation organisations supporting CBNRM in PAs and neighboring communities in Western Uganda. A qualitative research approach was applied using ethnographic research strategy. Data were collected through in-depth and informal interviews of conservation organisations’ staff, local leaders and communities, document analysis and participant observation. Results: This study finds that ME is aligned to generate performance evidence donors require, with little use locally. ME politics determines the evidence generated, aligned to powerful interest and donor information needs. Political leaders demand participation in monitoring projects for political capital by demonstrating their commitment to electorate. Conclusion: Dealing with ME politics requires acknowledging its positive and negative implications and leveraging existing opportunities to achieve ME objectives. Contribution: This paper highlights how to deal with politics of ME and underscores designing and conducting ME as a technical and political process.
Background: Monitoring and evaluation (ME) is pivotal for improving the effectiveness and relevance of in-service training programmes for healthcare providers, especially in African and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While information technology (IT) tools are increasingly being used to monitor and evaluate these programmes, empirical research on their application is limited. Objectives: This systematic review aimed to critically examine and highlight the role of IT in ME for in-service training programmes for healthcare providers in African and other LMICs. Method: A systematic approach was undertaken, integrating information systems (IS) and evidence-based guidelines to evaluate IT tools used in ME of in-service programmes. Studies published in English from 2014 onwards were reviewed. Results: The review identified 28 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies – 17 out of the 28 articles (61%) – originated from Africa, 10 (36%) from Asia, and 1 (4%) from Oceania. A significant proportion of the studies – 23 out of 28 articles (82%) – reported using desktop-based software primarily for data collection, cleaning, analysis and storage. Conclusion: The findings indicated that the increasing use of IT in the ME of in-service training programmes for healthcare providers in LMICs holds considerable promise for improving data management and facilitating more informed decision-making to enhance healthcare delivery. Contribution: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first systematic review conducted to explore the use of IT tools for monitoring and evaluating in-service training programmes for healthcare providers across various health sectors in LMICs.
Background: African higher education institutions lag behind their global counterparts in the number of research outputs produced. To address this shortcoming, early-career researcher development programmes play a critical role. Monitoring and evaluation (ME) are vital in assuring that such programmes deliver meaningful outcomes. However, ME is an expensive process, which is problematic in the resource-constrained context of the African continent. Traditionally, practitioners use expensive data analysis software suites such as the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for analysing quantitative ME data. Although open-source programming languages such as Python are free to use, there are no libraries in Python aimed at the analyses needed for quantitative ME data, resulting in a steep learning curve for new Python users. Objectives: The objective of this article was to develop a Python library of functions to make Python a user-friendly alternative for analysing quantitative ME data. Method: A Python library of functions automating ME data analysis procedures was developed. The Python ME library was tested in this article on quantitative evaluation data of an early-career researcher development programme event and the output compared to that obtained using the SPSS general user interface (GUI). Results: The Python ME library functions produced identical results to the output produced using the SPSS GUI. Conclusion: The results showed that the Python ME library makes Python a viable, free and time-saving alternative for the analysis of quantitative ME data. Contribution: This article contributes by providing a free alternative method for analysing quantitative ME data, which can help evaluation practitioners in the developing world reduce the costs associated with evaluating capacity development programmes.
Background: Results-based management (RBM) aims to enhance accountability, transparency and effectiveness in the allocation and utilisation of resources. In the not-for-profit sector, particularly among non-governmental organisations (NGOs), RBM has been pivotal in ensuring interventions are aligned with organisational goals and community needs, thereby maximising impact. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted the not-for-profit sector in Zimbabwe by causing unprecedented challenges such as restrictions on movement, supply chain disruptions and economic downturns.Objectives: This study examines the impact of the pandemic on the implementation of RBM within the not-for-profit sector in Zimbabwe.Method: A concurrent mixed methods approach was employed, using a survey of 190 not-for-profit organisations (NPOs), in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with NPO staff.Results: The findings reveal essential influences of COVID-19 on NPOs’ ability to implement RBM, identifying key factors influencing effectiveness during the pandemic, including organisational flexibility, donor support and communication strategies. Additionally, it highlights the need for strengthened capacities, such as data analysis skills and potentially adjusted incentive structures to support effective RBM.Conclusion: The study underscores the inherent challenges of RBM during a crisis, including uncertainty, competing priorities and the potential focus on short-term relief.Contribution: This research contributes to a greater understanding of the challenges and opportunities for NPOs implementing RBM during a global crisis. The findings offer valuable insights for NPOs, donors and policymakers to strengthen RBM practices and ensure continued effectiveness in achieving impactful results.
This Table of Contents reflects the print compilation of peer-reviewed articles published in the journal. Each article listed was originally published online under the journal’s open access model and remains individually accessible and citable. This compilation has been created solely for print distribution, reference, and archival purposes. No new research content is introduced. The publisher affirms that all articles included in this compilation have undergone the journal’s standard editorial and peer-review processes.
Background: Engaging emerging evaluators (EEs) in evaluation projects offers substantial benefits for both evaluators and organisations; however, effective guidance on empowering them is often limited. Objectives: This article provides actionable recommendations for empowering EEs across all phases of evaluation projects, drawing primarily on insights from EEs and their mentors. Leveraging the Eval4Action campaign’s standards for meaningful youth engagement, this article aims to enrich EEs’ learning experiences, foster their professional growth, and enhance evaluation quality and impact. Method: A qualitative and participatory approach was used, incorporating the author’s mentorship experiences, discussions with EEs and mentors, and consultations with established programmes such as the South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association’s (SAMEA) EE initiative and the EvalYouth Global Network. A comprehensive literature review on youth engagement and partnerships further informs this study. Results: Findings indicate that effective EE engagement relies on well-defined roles, open communication, and genuine appreciation of EEs’ contributions. Despite these needs, many EEs reported being limited to data collection roles, which restricts their opportunities for growth and limits their developmental impact within evaluations. Conclusion: Adopting these recommendations can foster a culture of empowerment and inclusion, enhancing both the quality and effectiveness of evaluation projects. Contribution: This study underscores the importance of engaging EEs in meaningful roles throughout projects, advancing inclusivity and effectiveness in evaluations. Empowering EEs leads to more comprehensive assessments, providing deeper insights for policy and programme evaluation.
Background: Evaluation in contexts of fragility and violence has recently received attention because of the increased complexity of conducting such evaluations. The use of digital tools has been advocated for conducting these evaluations, but with limited results.Objectives: This article presents an in-depth analysis of combining digital tools with in-person activities to build trust and develop the type of human interaction required to improve the quality of evaluation design and implementation in the context of insecurity, fragility and violence.Method: Data collection was conducted both offline and online. Enumerators collected data through face-to-face individual interviews, and statistical analysis was performed using STATA software version 17.Results: The objectives of data collection were achieved at 99%, notwithstanding the challenging security environment. Several factors contributed to this achievement, notably our methodological framework based on trust building, digitisation and iterative programming. Despite this commendable performance, the overall efficiency was found to be 63%, indicating a potential for a 37% reduction in data collection time.Conclusion: The proposed trust-based approach has been successfully tested to enhance the quality of baseline studies and establish conditions for the success of other phases of evaluations.Contribution: This case study serves as an evidence to what we call a trust-based approach to the use of digital tools in evaluation processes. We contend that the effectiveness of digital tools in enhancing the quality of evaluation design, especially in the context of fragility and violence, hinges on their integration with face-to-face activities, trust-based human interaction and careful timing.
Background: The higher education (HE) policy framework identifies funding inter alia as one of the steering mechanisms, for the transformation of HE in South Africa. However, the role of monitoring and evaluation (ME) in facilitating this transformation is still emerging. While the instrumental use of evaluation findings is common, research on how process use can also play a critical role in facilitating sector change is missing.Objectives: The study investigated the use of process evaluations in enhancing the performance of the University Capacity Development Grant in a previously disadvantaged institution in the Eastern Cape province.Method: Purposive sampling was used as a method to select the participants. The case study design, interpretive paradigm and qualitative methods approach were adopted, and data were collected through individual semi-structured interviews, focus groups and document review. The study sampled 17 participants, including the Department of Higher Education and Training officials, the University Capacity Development Programme (UCDP) management and two staff focus groups.Results: If process use is to be strengthened, the evaluation process must be highly adaptable to specific programmatic circumstances and organisational contexts.Conclusion: Evaluation process use, in its practical form, must go beyond issues of participation from an individual perspective and include organisational and stakeholder management for effective implementation.Contribution: The study’s results are pivotal as they would assist different organisations worldwide that are running similar projects as the UCDP but have not yet understood the benefits that would be obtained by key stakeholders involved in an evaluation process.
