When we evaluate a program or intervention, we need a way to judge its performance fairly and meaningfully. That’s where standards, evaluative criteria, and benchmarks come in; they help answer: How good is good enough?
Standards are agreed-upon expectations or performance levels. These might be as general as “minimum acceptable quality” or as detailed as a rule like “65% of funds must be spent on program activities”. They are like foundational yardsticks, like global SPHERE standards in humanitarian aid, which say people should have safe, accessible water, but leave room for interpretation based on context.
Evaluative criteria are the aspects of performance we explicitly judge, like relevance, effectiveness, or sustainability. They’re the lenses through which we assess an intervention’s worth or merit. For instance, OECD-DAC uses criteria such as relevance, efficiency, and impact to structure evaluations.
Benchmarks are comparative reference points or performance markers drawn from best practice or peer examples. They help us answer “How does this stack up?” or “How close are we to excellence?”.
These three elements work best when used together. Standards set the floor or sometimes the ideal goal. Evaluative criteria define what we judge. Benchmarks show us how we compare to high performers. By combining them, evaluations become both fair and aspirational; not just checking boxes, but inspiring growth.
List of recommended resources #
For a broad overview #
Benchmarking : Concept, Steps, Application, And Types With Examples
This video tutorial by LEARN & APPLY on Youtube gives an overview of benchmarking, why it is needed, its steps and types, along with practical examples of benchmarking.
This article by OECD defines the six evaluation criteria – coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, relevance, and sustainability – and their two principles for use. These criteria offer a standard framework for assessing the value or significance of a development intervention—whether it is a policy, strategy, programme, project, or activity. They form the foundation for making evaluative judgments about its performance and impact.
For in-depth understanding #
Applying Evaluation Criteria Thoughtfully
This guide by OECD gives an in-depth understanding of evaluation criteria. It discusses criteria within evaluation, their definitions and elements for analysis, along with using the evaluation criteria in practice.
UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Evaluation Reports Standards
This report gives an overview of the UNEG standards for UNICEF Global Evaluation Quality Oversight System. The report discusses the purpose, objective(s), and scope of the evaluation along with the methodology used for the evaluation.
Case study #
On the Long-Term Holistic Development Framework Principle of the CDF: An Evaluation
This paper by Ali Abdel Gadir Ali and Arne Disch provides a comprehensive overview and analysis of the Comprehensive Development Framework, an initiative taken by the World Bank’s President James D. Wolfensohn (1999), to enhance the effectiveness of the partners of development of the developing countries in bringing about desired development outcomes. The analytical framework used here is a benchmark against which the implementation of the CDF principle on the long-term holistic development framework (LTHDF) is evaluated.
Poland: Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes on Accounting and Auditing Update
This ROSC AA report by World Bank serves three main objectives: (i) to support Poland’s development strategy, particularly regarding the enhancement of economic competitiveness, (ii) to assess progress achieved under the Financial Reporting Technical Assistance Program (FRTAP), and (iii) to update the findings of the 2005 ROSC AA. The standards and their related codes in this report are relevant to economic stability, and private and financial sector development.
