How can you measure the success of a crisis evaluation process?

1 Goals and objectives

The first step in measuring the success of a crisis evaluation process is to define the goals and objectives of the evaluation. These should be aligned with the mission and vision of your organization, as well as the specific needs and expectations of the crisis situation. For instance, you may want to assess if the response adequately met the needs of those affected and stakeholders, identify any best practices or lessons learned, strengthen your organization's and partners' preparedness for future crises, or enhance accountability and transparency.

2 Criteria and indicators

In order to measure the success of a crisis evaluation process, it is necessary to select criteria and indicators to evaluate the response. These should be based on the goals and objectives of the evaluation, as well as the standards and guidelines of your organization and sector. For instance, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability are some common criteria and indicators that can be used. Relevance looks at how appropriate and tailored the response was to the context and needs of the affected population and stakeholders. Effectiveness assesses whether or not the response achieved its intended results and outcomes. Efficiency examines if the available resources were used optimally and timely. Impact evaluates how much the response contributed to positive or negative changes in the lives of those affected. Lastly, sustainability checks if the response created or supported long-term benefits and capacities for the affected population and stakeholders.

3 Methods and tools

The third step in measuring the success of a crisis evaluation process is to choose the methods and tools that will be used to collect and analyze the data and information for the evaluation. These should be appropriate and feasible for the scope and scale of the evaluation, as well as the availability and reliability of the sources. For example, desk reviews can be used to analyze existing documents and reports related to the response, while interviews can be used to gather opinions and feedback from key informants. Additionally, surveys can be used to collect quantitative and qualitative data from a representative sample of the target population or stakeholders, while focus groups can provide in-depth insights from a small group of participants with similar characteristics or experiences. Lastly, observation can also be employed to directly or indirectly observe the activities and results of the response.

4 Stakeholders and participation

The fourth step in measuring the success of a crisis evaluation process is to identify the stakeholders and their level of participation in the evaluation. These stakeholders, such as the affected population, responders, donors, authorities, media, and public, have an interest or influence in the response or evaluation. Participation is the degree of involvement and engagement of the stakeholders in the design, implementation, and dissemination of the evaluation. For instance, they can be informed about the evaluation and its results, consulted for their input and feedback, collaborate with evaluators on the evaluation and its results, or be empowered to conduct or lead the evaluation and its results.

5 Reporting and dissemination

The fifth step in measuring the success of a crisis evaluation process is to prepare and share the report and the findings of the evaluation. The report should be clear, concise, and comprehensive, including an executive summary, introduction, findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The dissemination should be tailored and targeted to the different audiences and purposes of the evaluation. This can be done through briefings, workshops, publications, media such as infographics, videos, podcasts, or webinars. All these formats will help to present the results to key stakeholders and decision-makers in an interactive way.

6 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?