Evaluation Services

Evaluation

We evaluate what matters — and tell you what the data actually says.

Development programmes operate in messy, fast-changing environments. Governments shift priorities. Conflicts reshape entire sectors overnight. The question is never simply "did it work?" — it is "what worked, for whom, under what conditions, and what should change next?"

IMACON conducts independent evaluations grounded in the OECD/DAC framework (relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability) and aligned with DeGEval quality standards. But frameworks alone don't produce useful evaluations. What does: going to the field, speaking the language, and knowing enough about the local context to ask the right follow-up question.

What this looks like in practice

Multi-country digital divide study across Asia and the Middle East

When DVV International needed to understand how digitalisation was affecting access to adult learning for marginalised populations, we conducted parallel studies in Cambodia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Palestine. The research examined how factors like rural isolation, gender, age, and ethnicity shaped digital exclusion — and what community-based learning centres could realistically do about it. Three country studies plus a cross-country analysis delivered within a single project cycle.

Impact evaluation of Lifelong Learning Centres in Cambodia

Cambodia's Department of Non-Formal Education was piloting a new institutional model — community-based learning centres meant to reach populations that the formal education system doesn't serve. We evaluated the intervention at three levels: macro (did it influence national policy?), meso (are the centres institutionally viable?), and micro (are learners actually acquiring skills that change their lives?). The evaluation surfaced both what was working and what the next programme phase needed to fix.

Strategic evaluation of media education in wartime Ukraine

For DW Akademie, we assessed the effectiveness of journalism training programmes — including a School for Universal Editors, a Journalism Teachers Academy, and media literacy initiatives targeting seniors vulnerable to disinformation. The evaluation examined which capacity-building formats (intensive schools vs. flexible modules) produced lasting professional change, and how wartime conditions reshaped both media consumption and the viability of traditional training models.

Ex-post and midterm evaluation of adult education networks in Kyrgyzstan

A two-phase evaluation covering a completed programme cycle (2018–2020) and an ongoing one (2021–2023). The focus: whether a network of adult education providers — serving unemployed people, prisoners and ex-prisoners, rural women, and youth — was professionalising fast enough to survive without donor funding. We assessed institutional capacity, strategic planning, public communication, and the quality of educational services across sectors ranging from civic education to prevention of violent extremism.

Sectors and geographies

Adult learning and lifelong education, media development, civic education, democratic governance, conflict management, prevention of violent extremism, social inclusion and rehabilitation. Operating across Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan), South Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan), Southeast Asia (Cambodia), Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Moldova), and the Middle East (Palestine, Jordan).

Methodology

Mixed methods — always. Desk review of programme documentation and secondary sources. Key informant interviews with programme staff, beneficiaries, government counterparts, and independent observers. Focus group discussions where appropriate. Quantitative data analysis when baseline data exists. Participatory feedback workshops (Change Workshops) that turn evaluation findings into actionable recommendations with the people who will implement them.