Discuss

I experienced to handle evaluation assesment but it's in school. I don't know if it fits to the evaluation that you're looking for. But since organization evaluationa assesment is what you're looking for then maybe you should try to approach some organization near you.

Andy, I realize you posted this question several weeks ago now, but I just came across a few resources that you might find interesting if this topic is still on your radar. 

http://dmeforpeace.org/learn/evaluation-needs-assessment

http://dmeforpeace.org/learn/capacity-and-organizational-readiness-evaluation-core-tool

The Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) is currently working on developing an index to assess donor committments to the use of evidence, identifying and rewarding progress and good practice. While this index has not been released yet, I imagine this could provide a blueprint for assessing organisational committments to evaluation. For more on c2e, click here. 

A few weeks ago they released a survey to guage perspectives on potential indicators and observable characteristics amongst the impact evaluation community. Listed below are their categorized answers that lay excellent groundwork for any future related works:

Overall the suggested indicators and observable characteristics can be regrouped around the following categories*: * Only specific quantifiable and observable characteristics from the answers provided by respondents are regrouped and synthesized below

On practice:

• The number of rigorous impact evaluations (by independent evaluation institutions) that a policymaker has demanded during the lastfive years.
• Percentage of programmes evaluated by an independent evaluation.
• Spending on M&E; amount of resources going to the evaluation as % of total resources; or the budget to hire or conduct evaluations as a percentage of total cooperation budget or ODA
• Degree of rigor in existing studies (e.g. Create a scale along "simple before-after" vs. "RCT")
• Conducting and/or funding impact assessments with counterfactuals at pilot. If no pilot, then build impact assessment into program design.
• Compliance with Evaluation Cooperation Group standards used as evaluation framework
• Frequency of evaluation activities within a project or programme

Organisation evaluation culture:

• My organization has an evaluation policy or framework
• My organization has established evaluation standards.
• My organization periodically holds evaluation reviews to glean lessons learned.
• My organisation supports/funds capacity building of executing/implementing agencies to design and conduct robust baseline and endline surveys.
• My organisation works jointly with executing/implementing agencies in designing programme/project logframes.
• Staff induction and job roles all include some involvement and responsibility for evaluation
• Requirement that relevant previous evaluations be referenced when designing new programs -- with evidence that previous lessons learned are being applied.
• Presence of a serious self-assessment system among staff Number of managers requiring evaluation results for making a decision
• Organization has a written record of how it responded to evaluation findings/recommendations, that can be verified
• Do the head of evaluation and other senior evaluation staff in the org know how to - and actually promote - the use of randomization, where possible, to evaluate their programs?
• Does the organization have an independent evaluation office that reports directly to the board in the case of a private organisation or to the parliament in the case of a donor.
• Financial investment in, and proof of implementation of, evaluation capacity training for staff at all levels.

Use of evidence:

• Number of scaled up projects due to evaluation findings
• Number of suspended (or not extended) projects due to evaluation findings
• Percentage of evaluation recommendations that are followed up on
• Number of programmes (new or new phases of programmes) that are clearly designed on the basis of existing evaluation based knowledge - e.g. documented through direct or indirect references in programme documents to evaluation insights.
• Project proposals have to refer to lessons learned from similar projects and quality assurance committee/investment committee verifies whether this has been included (and makes sense...)
• Managers are accountable for developing a response to evaluation results and sharing with stakeholders specific steps they will take to implement this response.
• Number of projects funded despite proof that they are ineffective (e.g. computers in classrooms, teacher training, ...)
• My organization has follow-up mechanisms to the findings of evaluations

Dissemination/transparency:

• The sharing/publication of data and evaluation findings. % of evaluations whose results are announced and published within an organization
• Evaluations are discussed with stakeholders / beneficiaries and agree together on next steps
• Publication of the analysis of 'failed' programmes.
• Dedicated (and protected) work time for group reflection of evaluative information pertaining to programming monitoring and evaluation collected data
• ALL details get published: details of the programme, of the evaluation, details of sample sizes (for programme& evaluation & control group), how they were chosen (incl. precise method of randomising)... Good & bad data is published. This is science: so it all needs to be open.