Skip to main content
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
Hi there!

Evaluation of Sweden-Funded Transparency International Zimbabwe

Transparency International - Zimbabwe is one of about 100 national chapters of the Transparency International global movement. As such, it operates as an autonomous entity, albeit with a degree of general guidance and policy support from TI’s Secretariat in Berlin. In particular, TI-Z’s programme areas and research tools such as the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre (ALAC), research methodology and Policy Legislation and Institutional Monitoring (PLIM) approach, are based on conceptual and methodological frameworks developed by the TI Secretariat in cooperation with national chapters. This is important, in that the credibility and impartiality of TI-Z, like that of other national chapters, is based in part on its implementation of internationally proven techniques. TI-Z is one of 17 TI chapters in sub-Saharan Africa.

In essence, the purposes of the evaluation served a dual objective:

  • To help the Embassy, its partners and counterparts to better account for their support to anti-corruption activities such as those undertaken by TI-Z and
  • To help TI-Z (and possibly other TI chapters) better assess its performance and capacity, and improve those in future.

In view of this and of the operating context, the evaluation has been both inclusive and constructive:

  • Inclusive (meaning that a broad range of stakeholders should be consulted) because the issue of corruption, as approached through the various TI research, information, policy and advocacy tools, has broad implications for a wide range of social groups, from large companies to private citizens.
  • Constructive (meaning that the evaluators should use participatory techniques and an appreciative enquiry approach) because the operating environment of Zimbabwe has been notoriously challenging. There would be no added value in noting delays or weaknesses in performance if the evaluators could not also propose constructive and realistic approaches that could help mitigate these challenges
Arrow up footer white blue