Evaluation involvement of local HIV/AIDS non-governmental organisations in Benin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: For some years, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society have become increasingly involved in the fight against the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa. But even though their role is well appreciated, their actions are perceived as ineffective because of a lack of monitoring and evaluation capacity.Objective: This paper aims to describe local HIV/AIDS NGOs’ involvement in evaluation and the characteristics of this involvement.Method: Descriptive analysis of data collected in questionnaires completed by 34 NGO executives (one per NGO).Results: Most NGOs do not have the minimal conditions required for positive and effective involvement in evaluations. In addition, funding agencies’ expectations for evaluations, total human resources as well as experience as NGO are contextual factors that explain most aspects of their involvement in evaluations.Conclusion: This study provides funding agencies, NGO leaders and all those interested in developing evaluation capacity in these NGOs to understand the extent of the task in this area. They must keep in mind that there is no solution for all, but that solutions must be adapted to the developmental level of each organisation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.045 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".