Report of the 6 th GEOSS Evaluation Presentation to GEO-XII 11 November 2015 John Adamec Co-Chair GEO Monitoring & Evaluation Working Group Evaluation Team CanadaRima Ammouri European CommissionGilles Ollier European CommissionIzabela Freytag GermanyGuido Halbig GreeceEvangelos Gerasopoulos JapanYukio Haruyama NorwayLars Ingolf Eide (Co-chair) South AfricaGeorge Chirima United StatesMatthew Druckenmiller (Co-chair) The Sixth Evaluation Team thanks: The GEO Secretariat for technical support and hosting meetings The National Observatory of Athens, Greece, for hosting the Teams final meeting (May 2015) The Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) for advertising the web-based survey Nadine D'Argent, Agnes Lane and others at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology for setting up and preparing statistics from the web- based survey All interviewees and survey respondents from across GEO Acknowledgements Sixth Evaluation Highlights Scope: and all SBAs & Transverse Areas. Re-examined major themes from prior evaluations Method: GEO Documents and Literature Public survey Key informant interviews Outputs: Directed to inform Strategic Plan Interim Report Final Report Sixth Evaluation Highlights: Findings Great value in convening power of GEO >Reflected in new Strategic Plan Strategy should include measureable outcomes >Core Function indicators in Doc. 11 Improve internal and external communication >Engagement strategy in Doc. 11 In situ observations require more focus >GD-06, non-space based systems Need suitable integration of evaluation in tasks >Requirement of initiatives and flagships THANK YOU! From the Evaluation Teams, , Monitoring & Evaluation Lessons Learned Presentation to GEO-XII 11 November 2015 John Adamec Co-Chair GEO M&E Working Group Achievement Adversity Response Monitoring & Evaluation Framework Started late (2009) Flexible plan, realistic expectations 6 Complete Evaluations Short timelines, limited resources Dedication of evaluation teams Successful responses to reports Many, >50, recommendations GEO Sec. and Boards inputs Lessons Learned The evaluation process was successful Too many evaluations Recommend: 2 Evaluations, 2019 and 2024 Plan: mid-term and end-term Lessons Learned M&E Recruitment more difficult over time M&E can be too far removed from programs Recommend: Embed M&E in GEOSec and Boards Plan: Monitoring in GEOSec, Evaluation under Programme Board Lessons Learned GEO measurement of member activities not feasible Reporting processes cumbersome and incomplete Strong tasks had unique success measures Recommend: Build M&E into tasks Recommend: Set M&E expectations to scope and maturity of task Plan: Implementation Plan mechanisms Lessons Learned Broad targets are not readily measureable Recommend: Define measureable outcomes Plan: Core function results and indicators Conclusion M&E remains a vitally important part of GEO The proposed plan for reflects these lessons learned. On behalf of the Monitoring & Evaluation Working Group: Thank you for your support. We look forward to continuing our involvement with the GEO community.