Empfehlungen für Auftraggebende von Evaluationen. Eine Einstiegsbroschüre

TL;DR

This DeGEval introductory brochure gives practical recommendations for commissioners of evaluations in German-speaking public, church, foundation, and association contexts. It covers preparing, scoping, tendering, accompanying, and using evaluations, emphasizing intended use, stakeholder clarification, result-openness, and choosing among external, internal, or self-evaluation.

Key findings

• The guide structures commissioning into five stages: preparation, framing, external tender and award, accompaniment during implementation, and dissemination/use of results. It advises first visualizing the relevant system of decision-makers, managers, target groups, and their environment.
• It recommends designing an evaluation from its intended use and timing, gathering questions from all participants, producing terms of reference, checking gender relevance, and considering ex ante, accompanying, and ex post evaluation. Baseline data and monitoring should be prepared early so changes can later be assessed.
• It distinguishes external, internal, and self-evaluation: self-evaluation tends to have the strongest field knowledge but the weakest methodological competence; external evaluation tends to reverse this and costs more. Larger measures or evaluations preparing political decisions should be external, while institutions should be evaluated regularly every few years, alternating internal and external formats.
• For procurement, it says external evaluations are services and should be competitively awarded. Tender documents should include subject, deadlines, exclusion criteria, competence requirements, weighted criteria, and a financial corridor; offers should cover evaluability, design, schedule, team allocation, methods, indicators, data, quality assurance, and protection of persons. After selection, unsuccessful bidders are informed and a 14-day objection period precedes contracting. The text also notes DeGEval was founded in 1997, held its 2005 annual meeting in Essen, and published standards in 2001 and further recommendations in 2002 and 2004.

Methods

• Design: a practice-oriented introductory brochure/guidance document, not an empirical study. It was developed by the DeGEval board after the 2005 Essen annual meeting for leaders and staff in public bodies, public-law corporations, publicly supported institutions, churches, foundations, and associations.
• Data or sample: none; no empirical sample, dataset, or fieldwork is reported. The text draws on DeGEval standards and earlier DeGEval publications, including the 2001 standards, the journal starting in 2002, and 2004 recommendations on self-evaluation and training.
• Main analysis: normative synthesis and structured recommendations, presented in a checklist-like sequence across the commissioning process. No statistical or qualitative analysis is reported.

Limitations

• Stated: the authors say the statements do not claim completeness or applicability to every concrete external evaluation, and that detail is naturally limited in an introductory brochure.
• Stated: the recommendations were developed for external evaluation, though they may also offer ideas for internal or self-evaluation; evaluation practice varies across fields and countries.
• Evident from the text: there is no empirical testing, case data, or outcome evidence, and the guidance is normative and tied to the DeGEval/German-speaking context.