Management Response Template
This template is included as a recommended template in the CAMSA. August 2014
Please consult the Oxfam Evaluation Guidance1 when planning an evaluation. This template should be filled out when closing an evaluation.
What’s this template?
This template summarizes the reflections of your team and program/project stakeholders in relation to the evaluation’s findings and recommendations and offers an opportunity to comment on the utility of the evaluation process and final report. The template is divided into two parts: The first part should be published together with the evaluation report (or its executive summary); the second part is for internal use only as it helps you define and track a detailed action plan in response to the evaluation findings
Why should this template be filled out?
Oxfam Policy on Program Evaluation
All evaluation reports must be accompanied by a management response that communicates careful consideration of the evaluation’s findings and recommendations, detailed actions that will be taken to respond to these findings, and offers an opportunity to comment on the utility of the evaluation process and final report.
(Page 4: Paragraph 11)
The overall purpose of a management response (MR) is to ensure that findings, conclusions and recommendations from Oxfam evaluations are given careful consideration and are acted on. Developing a management response in consultation with the relevant stakeholders helps us document our main learnings from evaluations as well as track our actions in response to the recommendations. Who should fill it out?
The evaluation manager is responsible for ensuring that a management response is prepared within a reasonably brief period of time after the finalization of the evaluation report or other products (see Oxfam Policy on Program Evaluation). The team that is responsible for the program implementation should participate in the development of the response. If the evaluated project or program has been implemented together with partners and/or communities, these stakeholders should, in a way appropriate to the evaluation context, also participate in the discussion of findings and the development of a response (specifically regarding recommendations that are addressed to them).
When should this tool be filled out?
The management response should be filled out when you discuss the findings and recommendation of an evaluation with relevant stakeholders, i.e. at the end of an evaluation. Before responding to the evaluation findings and recommendations, you should assess the quality of the evaluation and the validity of its findings and recommendations (see Evaluation Quality Assessment Tool in CAMSA) Where you choose to not act upon findings and recommendations, because they are not clearly justified by the evidence presented in the evaluation report/products, this should be clearly communicated. However, together with the relevant stakeholders you should discuss also those recommendations on which Oxfam may not be able to act directly (e.g. when partners are addressed in recommendations) and agree on options to address these
The preparation of the management response, review by senior management and posting on SUMUS (as well as submission for posting on the Oxfam public website) should happen within a reasonably short timeframe from the moment the evaluation is submitted to the evaluation manager
What to do with the tool once completed?
Internally, the MR should be used to track actions as agreed. After an evaluation is completed the MR should be posted on SUMUS and the Oxfam website together with the evaluation product itself (i.e. the evaluation report) and the evaluation quality assessment tool Please notify the OI secretariat by email (meal@oxfaminternational.org) where the documents are posted.
CAMSA minimum requirements regarding the management response
1. The commissioning manager must issue a management response to the review or evaluation. The team that is responsible for the program implementation can participate in the development of the response. It should include how Oxfam plans to use the findings and recommendations to review program planning and strategy.
2. To ensure transparency to Oxfam’s constituents, Oxfam will routinely place the executive summary and management response for all evaluations of Oxfam programs or projects on www.oxfam.org and/or the affiliate’s website. Barring unacceptable risk or repercussions to staff, partners or program efforts, the complete reports from all final program or project evaluations will be posted on the website.
Oxfam Management response to the evaluation of Women’s Voice and Leadership Guatemala
This information is for internal use only and should not be published.
Prepared by: Carla Caxaj, MEAL PO, Oxfam Canada
Contributors: Eva Mejia, Project Officer, Oxfam in Guatemala, Monica Bau, Gender Justice Coordinator, Oxfam in Guatemala Roxanne Murrell, Program Officer, Oxfam Canada
Signed off by Oxfam in Country:
Country: Guatemala
Signed off by Oxfam Affiliate:
Affiliate: Oxfam Canada
Date:
Date:
This part of the management response should be written in an accessible way for external audiences!
A: Context, background and findings
1. The context and background of the evaluation, i.e the purpose and scope of the evaluation
The WVL-G project was implemented from September, 2019 to March, 2024 by Tz’ununija’ in coordination with Oxfam in Guatemala (OiG) and Oxfam Canada (OCA), with financial support from Global Affairs Canada (GAC). The project is part of GAC’s Women’s Voice and Leadership (WVL) Program, which aims to directly strengthen the capacities and actions of Women’s Rights Organizations (WROs) in 28 countries. WVL-G set as its Final Outcome “greater enjoyment of women and girls’ human rights and the advancement of gender equality in Guatemala”. The Final Evaluation of the project Women’s Voice and Leadership Guatemala was carried out with external consultants and completed in March 2024. The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the relevance, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the project achievements and identify collective learnings.
2. Summary main findings and recommendations
- The Indigenous Women’s Rights Organizations (IWROs) request that the needs they have expressed be considered and that future training processes include topics related to: Theoretical, technical aspects for the preparation; of the AWP and the Strategic Plan; Advocacy and Social Audit; Project development and management, project; financial management; methodologies and techniques to facilitate groups, assemblies, commissions, committees, meetings with greater presence of men and authorities.
- In order to empower IWROs, women leaders and human rights defenders, the modules on violence should include aspects related to how to address the issue with partners, family, children, as well as ways to confront new violence generated by the exercise of the right to participation and leadership (in the community).
- It is important to continue with a co-creation approach between Tz’ununija’ and Oxfam in all dimensions of project implementation, strengthening the progress made by Tz’ununija’ as a partner of Oxfam and GAC. Systematizing the experience of this project is essential
- When defining indicators for the project, it is important to consider the characteristics and conditions of WROs in order to better assess their best practices in governance and management.
- In order to strengthen monitoring, evaluation and learning, it is proposed to include in the Monitoring Matrix (or another system) the development of tools that allow for data collection and registration of qualitative information, including: challenges faced, learning, changes generated in IWROs and leaders, ancestral/ community authorities, youth or other actors involved
- In view of Tz’ununija’s adoption of the CAT4GJO and its inclusion in the Global Plan 2024-2032 (Strategic Plan) for its application with local IWROs linked to Tz’ununija’, consideration should be given to including financial support and technical and methodological guidance from OiG and OCA. In terms of technical support, it is important to train Tz’ununija’ in the use of simplified reach databases, the generation of data and graphs and their analysis, and to develop a user’s guide
- Evaluate the possibility of separating the aspects covered in Capacity Domain 3 ‘Resilience and Sustainability’ by creating two domains. In the Sustainability Domain, assess how the concepts in the capacity areas of ‘Mobilizing Resources’ and
‘Gender responsive Financial Management’ can be presented in the context of WROs. In the new Resilience Domain, the definition should consider the different ways in which WROs and their members face contextual conditions
- The IWROs have repeatedly stated that they do not have the resources to carry out the planned activities; therefore, consideration should be given to the inclusion in the project of more financial resources for the implementation of the strengthening action plans, with the allocation of these funds being handed over to Tz’ununija’, so that they can transfer them to the IWROs and then monitor them. This would be an exercise that would allow the IWROs to manage funds for activities and they would be required to have a reporting mechanism to facilitate monitoring
B: Oxfam’s response to the validity and relevance of the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations. Include
3. Summary of evaluation quality assessment, i.e. quality of the evaluation is strong/mixed/poor and short assessment of the process (e.g. good, wordy report)
The quality of the evaluation is mixed. The evaluation combined good methodologies for data collection and collective analysis with partners, however it presented challenges in producing a report that could be easily understood by the diverse targeted audiences: IWROs, Oxfam and GAC. There was a strong data gathering process that was very contextualized and appropriate to the Indigenous women’s rights organizations (IWROs) targeted in the project and the consultant was able to capture the sentiments of Indigenous women in their journey to organizational capacity strengthening; a key outcome for the project. However, the report was very wordy and lengthy and therefore required a lot of summarizing and interpretation, as well as further data analysis to produce a key finding report more suitable for the different audiences: IWROs, Oxfam and GAC.
4. Main Oxfam follow-up actions (detailed follow-up actions should be included in the table below)
- Oxfam, along side Tz’ununija’, has developed a proposal for an extension to the project that includes some of the key learnings and recommendations.
5. Any conclusions/recommendations Oxfam does not agree with or will not act upon - and why (this reflection should consider the results of the evaluation quality assessment) No.
6. Additional reflections that have emerged from the evaluation process but were not the subject of the evaluation.
Detailed Action Plan on Key recommendations – for internal use only
A:
Summary actionable evaluation recommendations
Please list all recommendations that require specific actions as per the management response above. No. Evaluation Recommendation (copy from above)
ER 1 The IWROs request that the needs they have expressed be considered and that future training processes include topics related to: Theoretical, technical aspects for the preparation; of the AWP and the Strategic Plan; Advocacy and Social Audit; Project development and management, project; financial management; Methodologies and techniques to facilitate groups, assemblies, commissions, committees, meetings with greater presence of men and authorities
ER 2 In order to empower IWROs, women leaders and human rights defenders, the modules on violence should include aspects related to how to address the issue with partners, family, children, as well as ways to confront new violence generated by the exercise of the right to participation and leadership (in the community).
ER 3 It is important to continue with a co-creation approach between Tz’ununija’ and Oxfam in all dimensions of project implementation, strengthening the progress made by Tz’ununija’ as a partner of Oxfam and GAC. Systematizing the experience of this project is essential
ER 4 When defining indicators for the project, it is important to consider the characteristics and conditions of WROs in order to better assess their best practices in governance and management.
ER 5 In order to strengthen monitoring, evaluation and learning, it is proposed to include in the Monitoring Matrix (or another system) the development of tools that allow for data collection and registration of qualitative information, including: challenges faced, learning, changes generated in IWROs and leaders, ancestral/ community authorities, youth or other actors involved
ER 6 In view of Tz’ununija’s adoption of the CAT4GJO and its inclusion in the Global Plan 2024-2032 for its application with local IWROs linked to Tz’ununija’, consideration should be given to including financial support and technical and methodological guidance from OiG and OCA. In terms of technical support, it is important to train Tz’ununija’ in the use of a counting matrix, the generation of data and graphs and their analysis, and to develop a user’s guide
ER 7 Evaluate the possibility of separating the aspects covered in Capacity Domain 3 ‘Resilience and Sustainability’ by creating two domains. In the Sustainability Domain, assess how the concepts in the capacity areas of ‘Mobilizing Resources’ and ‘Gender responsive Financial Management’ can be presented in the context of WROs. In the new Resilience Domain, the definition should consider the different ways in which WROs and their members face contextual conditions
ER 8 The IWROs have repeatedly stated that they do not have the resources to carry out the planned activities; therefore, consideration should be given to the inclusion in the project of more financial resources for the implementation of the strengthening plans, with the allocation of these funds being handed over to Tz’ununija’ so that they can transfer them to the IWROs and then monitor them. This would be an exercise that would allow the IWROs to manage funds for activities and they would be required to have a reporting mechanism to facilitate monitoring
B: Detailed action plan
One action may address several recommendations. In this case list all recommendations that are addressed.
Key action(s)
1. An extension proposal was co-created following and improving on co-creation practices of the project. That proposal includes all other key action items listed below.
2. In the extension proposal trainings tailored to the demands of the IWROs were included to strengthen specific organizational capacity areas
3. Adaptations will continue to be made to the CAT4GJO to further contextualize the tool for Tz’ununija’ and the IWROs prior to applying it again and with new IWROs
4. In the extension proposal improvements will be made to the monitoring tools to strengthen monitoring and learning capacities of IWROS
5. In the extension proposal, a local fund for IWROs was created and the budgets for capacity strengthening plans for IWROs were increased.
Signed off by Oxfam in Country:
Country: Guatemala
Signed off by Oxfam Affiliate:
Affiliate: Oxfam Canada
Responding to recommendation no.
ER3, ER4 March 2024 OCA in coordination with Tz’ununija’ and Oxfam in Guatemala complet ed
ER1, ER2, ER4, ER5, ER6 Pending extension proposal
ER 2, ER6, ER 7 Pending extension proposal
ER5 Pending extension proposal
ER8 Pending extension proposal
Date:
Date:
Tz’ununija’, Oxfam in Guatemala with support from OCA
OCA with support from Tz’ununija’ and Oxfam in Guatemala
Oxfam en Guatemala, with support from OCA and Tz’ununija’
Tz’ununija’, Oxfam in Guatemala with support from OCA
