indicator selection and data collection with partner country HIV monitoring and health information systems.
• OGAC should complement program monitoring with a unified evaluation portfolio that includes periodic program evaluation at the PEPFAR country program and implementing partner levels to assess process, progress, and outcomes as well as periodic impact evaluations at the country, multi-country, and headquarters levels.
o OGAC evaluation guidance should provide information about prioritizing areas for evaluation, the types of evaluation questions, methodological guidance, potential study designs, template evaluation plans, examples of key outcomes, and how evaluation results should be used and disseminated. PEPFAR should support a range of appropriate methodologies for program evaluation, including mixed qualitative and quantitative methods, and should shift emphasis from probability designs to plausibility designs that provide valid evidence of impact.
To allow for some comparability across countries and programs, OGAC and HQ technical working groups should, with input from country teams, strategically plan and coordinate a subset of evaluations within programmatic areas that include (but are not limited to) a minimum set of centrally identified and defined outcome measures and methodologies.
Within PEPFAR-supported evaluation activities there should be an emphasis on the use of in-country local expertise to enhance capacity building for program evaluation and contribute to country ownership.
• For both program monitoring and evaluation OGAC should continue its work on defining and developing measures to assess progress in the currently under-measured areas of country ownership, sustainability, gender, policy, capacity building and technical assistance.
Further considerations for implementation of Recommendation 11-1B: Research
• OGAC should clearly define which activities and methodologies will be included under the umbrella of PEPFAR-supported research, as distinguished from program evaluation.
• OGAC should draw on input from implementing agencies, mission teams, partner countries, implementing partners, the Scientific Advisory Board, and other experts to identify and articulate research priorities and appropriate research methodologies. The research proposals and funding mechanisms should be designed to ensure that these priorities are met and that methodologies are applied through requests for applications and other investigator-driven research pro-