Abstract
Donor agencies rely to varying degrees on desk reviews by headquarter staff for the selection, monitoring and evaluation of projects initiated by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). If information provided in the various documents submitted by NGOs is inadequate or incomplete then the reliability of desk reviews as a management tool for allocation of project funding becomes questionable. A study of European Union funding of NGO projects compared findings from a desk evaluation of a structured sample of 30 projects with those from a field assessment of the same projects. The findings show that a field assessment on the basis of more complete information from a wider range of stakeholders leads to a markedly lower scoring on most of the standard criteria of project evaluation. An important policy implication is that ex ante screening, monitoring and evaluation on the basis of project documents are an ineffective management tool for donor agencies if not backed up by substantive follow-up in the field. This article places such management tools in the wider context of principal-agent relations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.