Solid evaluation work is a key part of effective emergency management practices. Without a proper evaluation, a response to an emergency might fail to address key needs or overlook critical obstacles. Evaluations also allow for lessons to be learned from each response so that responses are managed more effectively in the future. It is important to understand however that there is no flawless, cookie-cutter approach to emergency response or evaluation of emergency management. Every emergency has its own unique context that requires a slightly different response. The unique context will to some extent determine how the situation is managed.
However, there must be some sort of base evaluation standards so that those who manage emergency responses are held accountable for their work. The attached article highlights the benefits of an interagency approach, which tends to be the standard in humanitarian response to large emergencies. The inter-agency approach asks if the response plan was relevant to the needs of vulnerable groups and if it was effective in terms of meeting needs. It also looks at if it was sustainable as in what its positive, negative, intended, and unintended effects were. This approach also examines the extent of partnerships with stakeholders and the quality of coordination reaching affected populations. These evaluation standards are rooted in humanitarian principles like that of “do no harm,” addressing suffering, and remaining impartial so that action is carried out on the basis of need alone. Evaluating management with standards rooted in those principles allows evaluators to ensure that a response complies with guidelines of effective disaster management.