This paper describes the development of a guide on evaluation, commissioned by UNICEF for their field officers in 2006. The consultation process in developing the content of the guide is discussed, revealing varying perceptions of what is known and practiced in the field in relation to evaluation. Broader findings about evaluation design and methods are also discussed, based on a review by the Mailman School of Public Health. The paper then focuses on specific aspects of evaluation of psychosocial programmes that seem to generate particular difficulties in practice. It considers firstly the conceptualisation of psychosocial wellbeing in the definition of indicators of output, outcome and impact levels. Secondly, case studies are examined to illustrate the challenges of using methods, both qualitative and quantitative, in the context of complex emergencies. Thirdly, the paper considers the tension between ‘evaluation as research’ and ‘evaluation as reality’ and discusses the relative values that are reflected in the field.

This article reports the 25 recommendations made by a NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Evaluation of Community based Psychosocial Programmes in Areas Affected by War and Terrorism that took place in April 2007. It summarises the workshop's agreements on how evaluators should combine values, evidence and their experience, and that of programme providers, when they design and conduct their work.

Evaluation of psychosocial programmes can be carried out for a variety reasons. It is the nature of these reasons that determines what is exactly is evaluated, what criteria and which methods are used. In this article, the focus is on evaluation as a pathway to learn from experience and develop expertise. Some evaluation criteria are discussed, and a step-by-step plan is described.

Evaluation of psychosocial and community oriented projects includes a series of procedures to determine if project outcomes are achieved by an activity planned to help reach an individual or socially relevant goal. Typically, various stakeholders have an interest in evaluation of psychosocial projects. These may include project staff and manager, donors, authorities, beneficiaries and the community. Sometimes their interest in evaluation seems to be in conflict, but clarification of interests can lead to complementary positions. Evaluation is basically a decision making tool about the future of a project. The basic assumption in evaluation is that it should identify observable or measurable outcomes (consequences, results) that can be used to demonstrate that the project is reaching the goal and objectives. One of the crucial elements in this process are evaluation indicators which need to satisfy several universal criteria, while their specific content and data collection method should reflect the specifics of the project under evaluation.

This paper reviews what is currently known from research about the effectiveness of interventions to address mental health problems in children and adolescents affected by armed conflict. The focus will be on interventions delivered in conflict affected countries either during active humanitarian emergencies or during the post conflict period. The paper will discuss two main paradigms of intervention dominating the field: psychosocial approaches and clinical/psychiatric approaches. The paper reviews some of the basic literature, theories and issues involved in assessment, programme planning, monitoring and evaluation of both approaches. In order to explore these issues in depth, the paper will draw from the author's field experiences with research in the Russian Federation and in northern Uganda. The paper also presents a brief review of a handful of other published evaluations of mental health interventions for war affected children. We will close with a discussion of what future research is needed to build an evidence base regarding mental health interventions for children affected by armed conflict as well as the ethical and feasibility issues associated with carrying out this work.

Evaluations of psychosocial projects are meant to contribute to better projects. However, in practice, the evaluation process, in particular when done by external evaluators, can pose its own difficulties. Based on a wide field experience, the author presents arguments about how evaluations can cause problems, and even produce negative effects in project staff and recipients of assistance. Psychological processes triggered by external evaluators, or appearing in the process of evaluation, can create uneasiness in field workers. Also, some evaluation methods have questionable cultural acceptability. The author argues that evaluation designers, publishers of evaluation reports and researchers have an ethical and social responsibility.