July 2011

It is summer here and evaluation debates have heated up along with the weather. First, an international conference asks how to get research into action. Then a blogger questions whether research is skewed by the pressure to “count” things, while another asks the same question about funding sources. A Boston Review article makes the case for doing impact evaluations, and a new research paper shows how to reduce bias from data mining. Given all the ferment, it is good to hear that Chile has joined 3ie, demonstrating the growing public commitment to continuing these debates so we can get better evidence and improve public policies.

Before closing, I want to express my special thanks to Christina Droggitis who has been helping me with the Evaluation Gap Newsletter and will be leaving CGD this month to pursue graduate studies. Thanks Christina and best wishes!

Regards,


William D. Savedoff
Senior Fellow

Chile joins 3ie

Chile became the latest country to join the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation. Planning Minister Felipe Kast made the announcement in Cuernavaca at the "Minding the Gap" conference. He highlighted the role of evaluation in fulfilling an ethical imperative to spend public funds effectively, especially in reducing poverty. With this announcement, Chile joins other countries –like Mexico, Uganda, Fiji, and Pakistan – in supporting and building on the work of 3ie, which seeks to foster strong international collaboration with special attention to south-south collaborations, as noted by Paul Gertler, who leads 3ie's Board.

Standards of evidence – raising the heat?

In June, some 400 evaluators, policy makers and program managers from around the world gathered in Cuernavaca, Mexico to share their experiences with impact evaluations and influencing public policy. "Minding the Gap: From Evidence to Policy Impact", was an opportunity to reflect on the growing body of impact evaluation, especially a plenary on “What Have We Learned” that featured Ruth Levine (Hewlett), Carola Alvarez (IDB), Esther Duflo (J-Pal), and Gonzalo Hernandez-Licona (CONEVAL). A conference forum contains blog posts from Christelle Chapoy, Santosh Mehrotra, Orazio Attanasio, Lawrence Haddad, Emilie Wilson and many others. Recorded sessions are also available on the website.

Getting from evidence to action

In "More Evidence of Rising Standards of Evidence", I drew attention to an NBER working paper, distributed this month, which raises the bar on standards of evidence. "The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment: Evidence from the First Year", used a natural experiment to answer questions about the impact of health insurance in a country (the U.S.) where health reform is a hotly contested issue. Perhaps in recognition of this, the authors chose to preempt attacks on their impartiality by publicly archiving their plan for data collection and analysis. Whatever the reason, this attention to bias, along with other features of the evaluation, are practices which are increasingly becoming the norm for good evidence that can inform policy for the better.