242 - Amplifying voices from under-evaluated, food insecure regions of the world: Evaluations of humanitarian activities in Bangladesh, South Sudan and Ethiopia

Abstract Information: This multi-paper panel presents our experiences and findings from evaluations of USAID-funded activities across Bangladesh, South Sudan, and Ethiopia in humanitarian contexts. Primarily, we focus on methodological and logistical challenges in designing and implementing rigorous evaluations within humanitarian contexts. One common challenge is creating comparable control groups, especially when the evaluation is conducted retrospectively. The evaluations in Bangladesh and Ethiopia utilized satellite imagery and spatial data to identify a counterfactual for a retrospective impact evaluation. The evaluation in South Sudan utilized a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to investigate the impact of a multi-year emergency program. Since we were evaluating the impacts of the project implemented in a humanitarian condition, restricting all the treatment activities in the Control group was neither practical nor ethical. Our implementing partner provided some life-saving activities (e.g., food and medicines) and peacebuilding activities in Control groups. All evaluations employed mixed methods approaches, pairing quantitative analysis with rigorous qualitative inquiry, to understand participant and community experiences of the interventions studied. Our efforts extended beyond conventional evaluation boundaries, reaching into under-evaluated and often overlooked areas and amplifying the voices of local communities. We also present the myriad challenges encountered during data collection amidst the backdrop of ongoing conflict and natural disasters in South Sudan. In Ethiopia, our evaluation looks at the impact of a tuber crop-based intervention on food insecurity, aiming to provide longitudinal insights into sustainable development outcomes. The collective learnings gleaned from these evaluations not only furnish policy-relevant feedback for policymakers but also serve as a beacon of guidance for development practitioners and researchers navigating the complex terrain of evaluating humanitarian interventions. This also helps to ensure accountability to the affected population.