17. The evaluation methodology employed was designed to ensure that all or most of the required data and information was captured. Background information was obtained by reviewing the two project documents and the related revisions. Much of the information on the attainment of results was obtained from progress reports, selfevaluation factsheets, substantive reports, memoranda of understanding, Advisory Board meeting minutes, the RONA website, publications and print and electronic media coverage of RONA and the environment. From these secondary sources, it was possible to establish whether objectives had been met, results achieved and outputs delivered.
18. The other method used in obtaining information was through informal interviews and discussions with some permanent missions to the United Nations, formal interviews with RONA key officials (as listed in the annex to the present report) and UNEP management at headquarters and discussions with staff members of the United Nations Secretariat and other United Nations agencies. These discussions and interviews enabled the evaluator to clarify information, verify data and gain an objective, onthespot view of the situation.
19. An exit interview was held with the RONA Director. The first draft of the report was also made available to RONA and key informants, as well as to UNEP management at headquarters. This process made possible the correction of facts, verification of findings and the formulation of strategic and policy inputs, with a view to strengthening the recommendations.
20. The approach taken by the evaluation proved valuable as it enabled information and perspectives to be obtained from a wide range of informants, including UNEP partners, collaborators and donors. It was not possible, however, physically to verify all the outputs referred to during interviews. It was sometimes difficult to separate factual information from personal views which were presented as factual information.