Guest Post: The Need for Better Monitoring and Evaluation of Anticorruption Projects

Today’s guest post comes from Tom Shipley, a researcher at the Centre for the Study of Corruption at the University of Sussex.

While the anticorruption field is rife with disagreements and debates about “what works,” one thing that pretty much everyone can agree on is the need for more and better evidence. This is why it is so important that governments and other organizations engage in appropriate monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities to assess the impact of their anticorruption work. Lots of organizations conduct M&E activity—but how good is it? A new report developed at the Centre for the Study of Corruption and published with the U4 Anticorruption Resource Centre seeks to provide a comprehensive review of anticorruption M&E in development cooperation. The report, which is based on a structured review of 91 evaluation reports published by 11 development agencies and non-governmental organizations, examines the M&E evidence available for a range of anticorruption measures implemented in a wide range of countries.

The findings are disappointing. Although there are some high-quality evaluations, the review demonstrates there are systematic problems with the quality of the evidence produced through M&E. Continue reading