Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
  • Who we are
  • News
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Search

Secondary Menu

  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Featured Projects
      • Inclusive Innovation
        • Agricultural Systems Special Issue
      • Proposal Reviews
        • 2025-30 Portfolio
        • Reform Advice
      • Foresight & Trade-Offs
        • Megatrends
      • QoR4D
      • Comparative Advantage
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
    • About
      • Who We Are
      • Our Mandate
      • Impact Assessment Focal Points
      • SPIA Affiliates Network
    • Our Work
      • Country Studies
        • Community of Practice
        • Bangladesh Study
        • Ethiopia Study
        • Uganda Study
        • Vietnam Study
      • Causal Impact Assessment
        • Call for Expressions of Interest: Accountability and Learning Impact Studies
      • Use of Evidence
      • Cross-Cutting Areas
        • Capacity Strengthening
        • Methods and Measurement
        • Guidance to IDTs
    • Resources
      • Publications
      • Blog Series on Qualitative Methods for Impact Assessment
      • SPIA-emLab Agricultural Interventions Database
    • Activities
      • News
      • Events
      • Webinars
  • Evaluation
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Evaluations
      • Science Group Evaluations
      • Platform Evaluations
        • CGIAR Genebank Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR GENDER Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR Excellence in Breeding Platform
        • CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture
    • Framework and Policy
      • Evaluation Method Notes Resource Hub
      • Management Engagement and Response Resource Hub
      • Evaluating Quality of Science for Sustainable Development
      • Evaluability Assessments – Enhancing Pathway to Impact
      • Evaluation Guidelines
  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
  • Evaluation
Back to IAES Main Menu

Secondary Menu

  • Who we are
  • News
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Evaluations
    • Science Group Evaluations
    • Platform Evaluations
      • CGIAR Genebank Platform Evaluation
      • CGIAR GENDER Platform Evaluation
      • CGIAR Excellence in Breeding Platform
      • CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture
  • Framework and Policy
    • Evaluation Method Notes Resource Hub
    • Management Engagement and Response Resource Hub
    • Evaluating Quality of Science for Sustainable Development
    • Evaluability Assessments – Enhancing Pathway to Impact
    • Evaluation Guidelines
Evaluation Reports & Reviews

Advisory Report: Study on the Performance Results Management System (PRMS) Project Management Approaches and Fit-for-Purpose Information Products

You are here

  • Home
  • Evaluation
  • Publications
  • Advisory Report: Study on the Performance Results Management System (PRMS) Project Management Approaches and Fit-for-Purpose Information Products

Abstract

Context and Objectives

Advisory study on the PRMS is a collaborative initiative between CGIAR’s Internal Audit Function and Evaluation function under the Independent Advisory and Evaluation Service (IAES), (see TORs, SC16 Background Resource).

Commencing in May 2022, the joint PRMS Advisory study sought to provide harmonized advice and recommendations for the re-design and implementation of CGIAR’s Performance and Results Management System (PRMS). Aligned with CGIAR's governance framework, the study aimed to independently identify and highlight inherent and emerging risks at each phase of the project on PRMS re-design. The PRMS study design built on lessons from the independent evaluations and studies, including: Independent evaluative reviews of 12 CGIAR Research Programs[1] (2020), Independent Evaluation of CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture (2021), and Technical Notes on the Use of Bibliometrics Towards Evaluating the Quality of Science (2021).[2]

The two-phased study approach coupled project risk analysis and formative evaluation in alignment with CGIAR-wide Evaluation Framework standards. The Study addressed two core principles in the CGIAR Evaluation Framework: EVALUABILITY and MEASURABILITY (see Figure 1).

evaluability and measurability

Towards addressing the PRMS study focus areas (Figure 2) the selected approach enabled responsiveness to shift in project management structures and the evolving PRMS redesign timelines. Evidence was gathered from primary and secondary sources to assess risks, draw conclusions and deliver recommendations rooted in evidence. Driven by the commitment to delivering valuable insights and recommendations, this dynamic methodology helped navigate the evolving landscape of the PRMS project.

Figure 2: PRMS study focus areas (original TOR, for scope control, Annex A2)

prms study focus area

In response to the 10 recommendations from the interim report by the joint PRMS study team, the PRMS core team supplied a detailed and formal Management Response (MR). In alignment with the TOR, the PRMS study team ensured that actual and potential risks were identified and implementation of related recommendations was monitored, highlighting accountability to internal and external stakeholder’s expectations. Three one-hour check-in meetings over four months occurred to monitor the MR’s implementation, as set out in the revised TOR (Annex).

The comprehensive report presents and narrates the high-level status of 10 interim report recommendations from the MR. The report highlights opportunities for further improvement, which include clarifying PRMS' scope and architecture, strengthening governance mechanisms, incorporating user feedback systematically, enhancing technological capabilities and conducting a comprehensive third-party peer review. Embracing these opportunities is crucial to maximizing PRMS' effectiveness and ensuring its contributions to CGIAR's continued success.

The length and depth of engagement under the original TOR, integrated deep engagement with selected members of the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) community of practice. While it enriched the content of the advisory engagement, it allowed the evaluation function to continue building alliances/relationships in the One CGIAR transition.

Study Highlights – Building Blocks

Links and Graphs

  • Functional Excellence: (e.g., how PRMS Reporting set new standards)
  • Innovative Capacity Building: (e.g., how the study equips teams for success)
  • Agile Project Management: (e.g., The approach for efficient project development)
  • MEL Community: (e.g., Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) etc.)
Related Links and Resources

Learn More

[1] Blog: https://cas.cgiar.org/evaluation/news/reflection-crp-2020-review-time-harmonize-data-and-definitions

[2] IAES, formerly CGIAR Advisory Services (CAS, ScienceMetrix, 2021)

Citation

CGIAR Independent Advisory and Evaluation Service (IAES). (2023). Advisory Report:
 Study on the Performance Results Management System (PRMS) Project Management Approaches and Fit-for-Purpose Information Products. Rome: IAES Evaluation Function. https://iaes.cgiar.org/

Share on

Evaluation
Issued on 2023
  • Download

Related Publications

MELIA cover page
Evaluation Reports & Reviews
Evaluation
Issued on 2025

Summary of Learning on Monitoring, Evaluation, Learning and Impact Assessments (MELIA): Knowledge Product

cover page
Strategic & Synthesis Studies
Evaluation
Issued on 2025

Partnerships: Summary of Evaluative Learning on CGIAR’s Ways of Working

Assessments & Commentaries
Evaluation
Issued on 2025

MELIA Needs Assessment Results: Assessing the Evaluability of CGIAR’s 2025-30 Portfolio

More publications

Related News

Blog
Evaluation
28 Apr 2025

Driving Change Through Evaluation: Key Insights from PCU’s Solomon Adebayo and Allison Poulos

Blog
Evaluation
10 Apr 2025

Speaking Truth to Power: The Role of Independent Evaluations and Integrated Partnership Board in Driving Meaningful Change in CGIAR

A man is working in a rice field
Blog
Evaluation
24 Mar 2025

Strengthening MELIA: Insights from Cristiano Rossignoli (WorldFish) & Moogdho Mahzab (IFPRI) on CGIAR Evaluations

More News

CGIAR Independent Advisory and Evaluation Service (IAES)

Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
Via di San Domenico,1
00153 Rome, Italy
  • IAES@cgiar.org
  • (39-06) 61181

Follow Us

  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • Terms and conditions
  • © CGIAR 2025

IAES provides operational support as the secretariat for the Independent Science for Development Council and the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment, and implements CGIAR’s multi-year, independent evaluation plan as approved by the CGIAR’s System Council.