vidence for policy-informed decision-making, budgeting and programming. National evaluation systems (NESs) are being set up across Africa, together with the processes and other monitoring and evaluation (ME) infrastructure for efficient and effective functioning.Objectives: This article seeks to document comparative developments in the growth of systems in Anglophone African countries, and provide an understanding of these systems for capacity-development interventions in these countries. It also aims to contribute to the public debate on the development of national ME systems, institutionalisation of evaluation, and use of ME evidence in the larger African context.Methods: This article uses four key dimensions as the conceptual framework of a national monitoring and evaluation system, including monitoring and evaluation systems in the executive; the functioning of parliamentary ME systems; professionalisation of evaluation and existence of an enabling environment. A questionnaire was used to collect information based on the key dimensions from government and non-governmental personnel. The Mo Ibrahim index of 2018 was used to collect information on enabling environment.Results: Findings indicate that all systems have stakeholders with different roles and contexts and are designed according to the state architecture, prevailing resources and capacities.Conclusions: This article concludes that the findings can be used as different entry points for developing and strengthening ME capacities in countries studied.

Background: Evaluation capacity development (ECD) is evolving to adapt to 21st century governance and development contexts across the world. Consequently, the ECD community is seized with processes of developing, implementing and sharing best ECD practices that are able to build strong and resilient individual and institutional ME capacities.Objectives: The article seeks to contribute to the on-going discourse and practice regarding evaluation capacity development (ECD) approaches and interventions in Anglophone Africa, Africa, the Global South and global best practice.Method: The article’s methodology is essentially centred on action research pursued during the course of co-planning and designing ECD interventions across English-speaking African countries, empirical data as well as the authors’ experiences and insights gained from leading ECD interventions across African countries.Results: The Centre for Learning on Evaluation and Results – Anglophone Africa’s (CLEAR-AA) principle of partnering and engaging governments and development partners throughout the life cycle of ECD interventions is paramount to cultivating country-owned and led national monitoring and evaluation (ME) systems that are sustainable and are able to facilitate a shift towards evidence-based decision-making.Conclusion: The value of this CLEAR-AA mission is that it offers the possibility of improving decision-making, policymaking and implementation and better service delivery and development outcomes in English-speaking Africa. While noting well-known ME challenges that impact the success of ECD interventions in Africa, the article highlights forward-looking CLEAR-AA strategies that seek to improve the success and impact of its ECD interventions in Anglophone Africa. Such strategies include the identification and use of ME champions in each country; working to integrate the ME function within public sector decision-making, development planning, implementation and budgeting processes; and building ECD partnerships with governments, non-governmental institutions and development partners who have intricate knowledge of country ME systems.