Introduction

Meta- evaluation has been introduced (Chapter 5) as a distinctive evaluation ‘type’, but one which, unusually, does not collect its own evidence. It remains an evidence- based set of methods, employing structured and systematic ‘legacy’ inquiry and based wholly on harnessing evidence from other research- based (and/ or evaluation) studies. The methods have a useful role to play in purposeful evaluation, especially in resource- and time- constrained situations.

Meta- evaluation can be an evaluative focus of itself or an ‘ex- ante’ aid to setting a sharp focus for a subsequent process, economic, or impact evaluation. Whatever the starting point, simply because a meta- evaluation uses existing evidence does not mean this is more informal than evidence- generating evaluations. To be effective, meta- evaluation shares with other types of evaluation the need for a clear and realistic purpose, acquisition of systematic evidence, and structured, comparative inquiry. There are also choices to be made about what synthesis approach is most appropriate to circumstances and purpose.

What is meta- evaluation?

Most evidence- generating evaluations draw on some aspect of ‘legacy’ information, perhaps for informing scope and design. Any of these will look to make best use of preceding research (or evaluation) or intervention data that is already available for profiling target populations or needs groups, past trends, or from ongoing monitoring or other sources. We might ask, how is meta- evaluation different in also doing so? The answer lies in the simple distinction that this is the only set of approaches which relies exclusively on pre- intervention legacy data.