The evaluation of projects, in their different types, contemplates a series of base criteria that allow them to establish their conclusions. Depending on the field, company or organization in question, a series of criteria or others will be used that are related to the strategic objectives pursued.

There are no single criteria; generally, the criteria arise based on the nature of each project; However, in most cases, the following five criteria defined by the OECD for international cooperation are taken into account: relevance ("effectiveness"), efficiency ("efficiency"), impact ("impact") and sustainability ("sustainability").[7]​[8]​[4]​.

• - Relevance or relevance: Observe the congruence between the project objectives and the identified needs and interests of the population and institutions (social consensus). It is especially observed in the ex-ante evaluation, but also in other types of evaluation.

• - Effectiveness: Extent to which the objectives of the intervention were achieved or expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance. It is observed in continuous and ex-post evaluations.

• - Efficiency: Measurement to which resources (inputs, funds, time, etc.) have been converted into the results of the project. This criterion is usual in the cost-benefit analysis carried out in the ex-ante evaluation.

• - Impact: Long-term positive and negative, primary and secondary effects, produced directly or indirectly by a development intervention, intentionally or unintentionally.

• - Sustainability: The extent to which the changes achieved by the project continue and remain over time in favor of the population and/or institutions, once the intervention has ended.[9]​ It is usually considered in impact evaluations.

It is essential to consider the evaluation from the needs and scope of the actions towards the target population.

Every evaluation must meet some methodological requirements to guarantee that the information it generates can be used in decision-making.[1]​[10]​ Thus, it is expected that every evaluation process will be:

• - Objective: The defined facts must be measured and analyzed as they are presented.

• - Impartial: The generation of conclusions from the evaluation process must be neutral, transparent and impartial. Those who carry out the evaluation must not have personal interests or conflicts with the project executing unit.

• - Valid: What has been planned to be measured must be measured, respecting the established definitions. If the object of analysis is too complex for an objective measurement, an initial qualitative approach must be made.

• - Reliable: Measurements and observations must be properly recorded, preferably using in-situ verifications.

• - Credible: All parties involved in the project must have confidence in the suitability and impartiality of those responsible for the evaluation, who in turn must maintain a policy of transparency and professional rigor.

• - Timely: It must be done at the right time, avoiding the negative effects caused by the passage of time.

• - Useful: It must be useful and prepared in a concise and direct language, understandable by all those who access the information prepared, the results of an evaluation should not be directed only to those with high technical knowledge but should serve so that anyone involved can become aware of the situation of the project.

• - Participatory: All those involved in the project must be included, seeking to reflect their experiences, needs, interests and perceptions.

• - Feedback: An evaluation process must guarantee the dissemination of the findings and their assimilation by those involved in the project (from senior management to the beneficiaries), in order to promote organizational learning.

• - Cost/effective: The evaluation must establish a positive relationship between its cost (economic, time and resources) and its contribution in added value to the experience of those involved in the project.

• Make informed decisions based on optimistic, pessimistic and realistic projections.

Contenido

En general, cualquier forma de evaluación de proyectos se basa en los conceptos y procedimientos de la metodología de la investigación científica,[11]​ sin embargo, cabe precisar que, cuando se efectúa una evaluación de proyectos de tipo de resultado o de impacto,es necesario asumir un diseño específico de investigación. Alguno de estos diseños son los siguientes:[12]​.

Evaluation only after

It is a simple design that lacks a baseline "Baseline (development projects)"). Its main defect is having little capacity to explain the effects achieved by a project.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

Simple before and after evaluation

This design allows us to compare the initial situation of the target population against the final situation, that is, after the project has been carried out. The cause-effect relationship between the project and its results is clearer, but it is not yet precise since uncontrolled external causes may have intervened.

Its scheme is as follows:

Quasi-experimental design

This design allows for an evaluation before and after the project intervention, also comparing the findings with a control group for the results "after" the intervention. The precision of this design is much greater than the previous ones and due to its technical feasibility it is the most recommended.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

• - "B" is a comparison group at the end of the project, with similar characteristics to the target population and that has not had a similar intervention.

Classic experimental design

This design also allows for a comparison before and after the project, but, in addition, it allows for a before and after comparison to be made in similar groups between their characteristics that have not been influenced by an intervention similar to that of the project. Its explanatory capacity is quite high, but its costs and technical difficulty also increase.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

• - "B" is a comparison group before the start of the project, similar to the target group with which the baseline was carried out "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "B1" is a comparison group at the end of the project.

Complex experimental design

It is a very complicated design, in addition to having a very high cost, so its application deserves a very broad foundation. This type of study seeks to determine the influence of each component of the project, and even the combination of various components in a project.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the intervention of a component of the project.

• "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention, independent of the other comparison groups.

• - "X1" is the intervention of a second component of the project.

• "B" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "B1" is a comparison group at the end of the project, independent of the other comparison groups.

• - "X2" is the intervention of a third component of the project.

• "C" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "C1" is a comparison group at the end of the project, independent of the other comparison groups.

The task of project evaluation is not easy and entails multiple difficulties, many of them methodological. but also of a political order.

• - Lack of availability of information.

• - Not having qualified personnel to carry out the work.

• - Customerism of the beneficiary population and those in charge of executing the project.

• - Lack of an evaluation and monitoring system, so the developed process is not known.

• - Community resistance. In this case, it often happens that the population has received many unfulfilled promises from politicians in power or a very high expectation has been generated regarding the project, which is why they develop a contrary attitude towards it; There is also resistance due to the prejudices or ignorance of the beneficiaries.[13]​.

• - Incorporation of Sustainability and ESG Criteria in Project Evaluation.

• - Juárez C., Socorro. Sistema de Administración Integral para la E.B.R.C.E.B.D.F.

• - Miklos, Tomás; Tello, Ma. Elena. Planeación Interactiva.

• - Kerzner, H. (2022). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling (13th ed.). Wiley.

Grades

• - Baseline (development projects) "Baseline (development projects)").

• - Logical framework.

• - Annex: Common definitions in project planning.

• - Evaluation of social projects at the World Bank.

• - Evaluation of projects at the Inter-American Development Bank.

• - National Public Investment System (SNIP) of the Republic of Peru.

• - Professional Career Service, Secretariat of the Public Service, Mexico.

• - Performance evaluation.

• - Support material.

• - Map of Monitoring and Evaluation Methodologies of social projects.

• - Evaluation of Projects for Entrepreneurs, Video blog.

• - Campbell Corporation. (2018, June). Community monitoring interventions can reduce corruption and improve services. Oslo: Campbell Collaboration.

• - Evaluation of programs and policies") Wikipedia page in English, not translated into Spanish.

The evaluation of projects, in their different types, contemplates a series of base criteria that allow them to establish their conclusions. Depending on the field, company or organization in question, a series of criteria or others will be used that are related to the strategic objectives pursued.

There are no single criteria; generally, the criteria arise based on the nature of each project; However, in most cases, the following five criteria defined by the OECD for international cooperation are taken into account: relevance ("effectiveness"), efficiency ("efficiency"), impact ("impact") and sustainability ("sustainability").[7]​[8]​[4]​.

• - Relevance or relevance: Observe the congruence between the project objectives and the identified needs and interests of the population and institutions (social consensus). It is especially observed in the ex-ante evaluation, but also in other types of evaluation.

• - Effectiveness: Extent to which the objectives of the intervention were achieved or expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance. It is observed in continuous and ex-post evaluations.

• - Efficiency: Measurement to which resources (inputs, funds, time, etc.) have been converted into the results of the project. This criterion is usual in the cost-benefit analysis carried out in the ex-ante evaluation.

• - Impact: Long-term positive and negative, primary and secondary effects, produced directly or indirectly by a development intervention, intentionally or unintentionally.

• - Sustainability: The extent to which the changes achieved by the project continue and remain over time in favor of the population and/or institutions, once the intervention has ended.[9]​ It is usually considered in impact evaluations.

It is essential to consider the evaluation from the needs and scope of the actions towards the target population.

Every evaluation must meet some methodological requirements to guarantee that the information it generates can be used in decision-making.[1]​[10]​ Thus, it is expected that every evaluation process will be:

• - Objective: The defined facts must be measured and analyzed as they are presented.

• - Impartial: The generation of conclusions from the evaluation process must be neutral, transparent and impartial. Those who carry out the evaluation must not have personal interests or conflicts with the project executing unit.

• - Valid: What has been planned to be measured must be measured, respecting the established definitions. If the object of analysis is too complex for an objective measurement, an initial qualitative approach must be made.

• - Reliable: Measurements and observations must be properly recorded, preferably using in-situ verifications.

• - Credible: All parties involved in the project must have confidence in the suitability and impartiality of those responsible for the evaluation, who in turn must maintain a policy of transparency and professional rigor.

• - Timely: It must be done at the right time, avoiding the negative effects caused by the passage of time.

• - Useful: It must be useful and prepared in a concise and direct language, understandable by all those who access the information prepared, the results of an evaluation should not be directed only to those with high technical knowledge but should serve so that anyone involved can become aware of the situation of the project.

• - Participatory: All those involved in the project must be included, seeking to reflect their experiences, needs, interests and perceptions.

• - Feedback: An evaluation process must guarantee the dissemination of the findings and their assimilation by those involved in the project (from senior management to the beneficiaries), in order to promote organizational learning.

• - Cost/effective: The evaluation must establish a positive relationship between its cost (economic, time and resources) and its contribution in added value to the experience of those involved in the project.

• Make informed decisions based on optimistic, pessimistic and realistic projections.

Contenido

En general, cualquier forma de evaluación de proyectos se basa en los conceptos y procedimientos de la metodología de la investigación científica,[11]​ sin embargo, cabe precisar que, cuando se efectúa una evaluación de proyectos de tipo de resultado o de impacto,es necesario asumir un diseño específico de investigación. Alguno de estos diseños son los siguientes:[12]​.

Evaluation only after

It is a simple design that lacks a baseline "Baseline (development projects)"). Its main defect is having little capacity to explain the effects achieved by a project.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

Simple before and after evaluation

This design allows us to compare the initial situation of the target population against the final situation, that is, after the project has been carried out. The cause-effect relationship between the project and its results is clearer, but it is not yet precise since uncontrolled external causes may have intervened.

Its scheme is as follows:

Quasi-experimental design

This design allows for an evaluation before and after the project intervention, also comparing the findings with a control group for the results "after" the intervention. The precision of this design is much greater than the previous ones and due to its technical feasibility it is the most recommended.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

• - "B" is a comparison group at the end of the project, with similar characteristics to the target population and that has not had a similar intervention.

Classic experimental design

This design also allows for a comparison before and after the project, but, in addition, it allows for a before and after comparison to be made in similar groups between their characteristics that have not been influenced by an intervention similar to that of the project. Its explanatory capacity is quite high, but its costs and technical difficulty also increase.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the project intervention.

• - "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention.

• - "B" is a comparison group before the start of the project, similar to the target group with which the baseline was carried out "Baseline (development projects)").

• - "B1" is a comparison group at the end of the project.

Complex experimental design

It is a very complicated design, in addition to having a very high cost, so its application deserves a very broad foundation. This type of study seeks to determine the influence of each component of the project, and even the combination of various components in a project.

Its scheme is as follows:

Where:.

• - "X" is the intervention of a component of the project.

• "A" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "A1" is the project's target population at the end of the intervention, independent of the other comparison groups.

• - "X1" is the intervention of a second component of the project.

• "B" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "B1" is a comparison group at the end of the project, independent of the other comparison groups.

• - "X2" is the intervention of a third component of the project.

• "C" is the baseline "Baseline (development projects)") of the corresponding component.

• "C1" is a comparison group at the end of the project, independent of the other comparison groups.

The task of project evaluation is not easy and entails multiple difficulties, many of them methodological. but also of a political order.

• - Lack of availability of information.

• - Not having qualified personnel to carry out the work.

• - Customerism of the beneficiary population and those in charge of executing the project.

• - Lack of an evaluation and monitoring system, so the developed process is not known.

• - Community resistance. In this case, it often happens that the population has received many unfulfilled promises from politicians in power or a very high expectation has been generated regarding the project, which is why they develop a contrary attitude towards it; There is also resistance due to the prejudices or ignorance of the beneficiaries.[13]​.

• - Incorporation of Sustainability and ESG Criteria in Project Evaluation.

• - Juárez C., Socorro. Sistema de Administración Integral para la E.B.R.C.E.B.D.F.

• - Miklos, Tomás; Tello, Ma. Elena. Planeación Interactiva.

• - Kerzner, H. (2022). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling (13th ed.). Wiley.

Grades

• - Baseline (development projects) "Baseline (development projects)").

• - Logical framework.

• - Annex: Common definitions in project planning.

• - Evaluation of social projects at the World Bank.

• - Evaluation of projects at the Inter-American Development Bank.

• - National Public Investment System (SNIP) of the Republic of Peru.

• - Professional Career Service, Secretariat of the Public Service, Mexico.

• - Performance evaluation.

• - Support material.

• - Map of Monitoring and Evaluation Methodologies of social projects.

• - Evaluation of Projects for Entrepreneurs, Video blog.

• - Campbell Corporation. (2018, June). Community monitoring interventions can reduce corruption and improve services. Oslo: Campbell Collaboration.

• - Evaluation of programs and policies") Wikipedia page in English, not translated into Spanish.