Scope of the International Development Review Group 

This International Development Review Group aims to conduct systematic reviews for international development. The scope of the group embraces all public policy sectors to provide evidence for national governments, international aid organisations, non-governmental organisations, regional and local policy-makers, practitioners, service users and the wider public.

Structure

This review group was established in response to the pilot programme of reviews funded by the UK Department for International Development. The goals of the pilot programme were to:

• Build support for the use of systematic reviews to increase evidence-informed decision making.
• Support the development of an institution to manage the creation and dissemination of systematic reviews as public goods.
• Make it easier for policy-makers and practitioners to develop evidence informed policy by using systematic reviews.
• Increase the value for money of policy by basing decisions on a rigorous understanding of what works.

More information about DFID’s support for systematic reviews

Peer review for many of the systematic reviews within this programme was coordinated by The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). 3ie works to improve the lives of people in the developing world by supporting the production and use of evidence on what works, when, why and for how much. 3ie is a new initiative that responds to demands for better evidence, and will enhance development effectiveness by promoting better informed policies. 3ie finances high-quality impact evaluations and campaigns to inform better program and policy design in developing countries. 3ie Systematic Reviews examine the range of available evidence regarding a particular intervention.

International Initiative for Impact Evaluations (3ie)
Tel: + 44(0)20 7958 8351/8350
http://www.3ieimpact.org

Funding

The initial reviews were conducted with funding from the UK Department for International Development. However the views expressed by these reports do not necessarily reflect the department’s official policies.