English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Guaranteeing the quality of the humanitarian sector has been challenging for some time. Several initiatives took place to enhance the performance in the field. Nevertheless reaching standards and avoiding mistakes is still not an organization's forte. So far, evaluation is the main tool for assessing the quality of humanitarian programmes that are providing accountability and the opportunity for learning from weak performance. But the added value of an evaluation is not always appreciated. Often it is seen as an additional burden to answer donor's request and a tool for destroying the organization's reputation. Change is rarely seen after conducting evaluations. Therefore, it is often assumed that an evaluation has no added value. This study aims to investigate an evaluation's utilization. The case selected is the Joint Evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean tsunami carried out in autumn 2005 in Aceh, Indonesia. The focus lies rather on its facilitation of learning than on providing accountability. The following study will asses to what extend the recommendations of the evaluation have been used and find out if the humanitarian performance improved.

Do they take the Advice? The Utilization of the TEC’s Recommendations on the International Tsunami Response on Local Capacities in Aceh, Indonesia