IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE - The information on this site is subject todisclaimercopyright notice
  EUROPA > European Commission > EuropeAid > Evaluation > Methodology > Evaluation tools > Expert Panel
Last updated: 18/06/2005

Expert panel


Quality control

• Evaluation Guidelines
• Methodological bases
• Evaluation tools
• Examples
• Glossary
• Sitemap

Expert Panel
• why and when
• how
• quality control
• examples
• bibliography



Questions Answer
Preparation and design  
Was the use of an expert panel fully justified by the impossibility of obtaining judgements by any other way?  
Has the possibility of conflicts of interest with the programme under evaluation been addressed?  
If experts with conflicts of interest remained on the panel, were the reasons for this exposed (such as a lack of available experts for the topic, a balance of points of view within the panel)?  
Did competences of the panel members allow for the coverage of all the topics to be studied?Did the skills of the panel member enable the coverage of all the topics to be studied ?  
Did the global balance of the panel composition favour a balanced approach to the topic under evaluation?  
Is the time allocated for the study sufficient to cover all the issues?  
Were the experts properly informed about their assignments and the panel's working procedures?  
Were the experts provided with sufficient interview guides, procedures, etc., to enable them to produce work which is homogeneous with the work of other expert panels?  
Were the possibility of empathic bias been taken into consideration?  
Was each expert effectively involved in the panel's work, throughout his membership?  
Has confidentiality of the study panel been achieved throughout the contract (for example, with systematic information about the need for confidentiality, systematic destruction of intermediary documents)?  
Does the report elaborate on the analyses carried out?  
Does the report shed lights on elements of consensus?  
Are reasons for dissenting views explained?  




Questions Answer
Was the use of an expert panel fully justified?  
Is the choice of the experts justified and relevant?  
Does the report elaborate on the analyses carried out?  
Are the elements of consensus clarified in the report?  
Are reasons for dissenting views explained and analysed?