II. SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY
The Committee held discussions with the Chief Director of MOYS and reviewed secondary data to identify key stakeholders with whom to interact. The Committee further held focus group discussions with the management team of GYEEDA, Regional Coordinators of GYEEDA and the monitoring and evaluation team of GYEEDA. The Committee also held key informant face-to- face interviews with each member of the management team, monitoring and evaluation team members, representatives of Service Providers (SPs), and other key stakeholders.

The committee requested for and was provided with documents including:

a. MOUs and contracts signed between the MOYS/GYEEDA and SPs;
b. Programme reports;
c. Programme documentation as listed in Annex 1. The committee also referred to policy documents and laws including the Ghana Shared Growth and Development Agenda (GSGDA 2010 - 2013), the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS I), the Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy (GPRS II), the Millennium Development Goals (2000 - 2015), the National Public Private Partnerships Policy document (2011), the Public Procurement (Act 663), the District Assemblies Common Fund Act, 1993 (Act 455).

In addition, the Committee reviewed financial data, beneficiary lists and MOUs provided by the SPs, at the request of the committee. The Committee carried out field data collection and on site evaluation at the MOYS; GYEEDA Head Office and in all the ten regions of Ghana specifically in 47 districts and sub-metros.

Generally, a qualitative methodology integrated with quantitative analysis for financial aspects and using basic management and organizational assessment tools were adopted for the task. Efforts to minimize any likelihood of bias in the evaluation were also made through triangulating data as much as possible to enhance the validity of the findings and conclusions drawn.

Primary data from a sample size of nine Management Team members, ten Regional Coordinators, four Monitoring and Evaluation Team members, representatives of SPs, three former Ministers of youth and sports, one Chief Director, about five hundred and twenty beneficiaries as well as sixty four staff of GYEEDA, was collected. In addition, work-plans, monitoring plans, activity and programme reports, minutes of meetings, staff profiles or curriculum vitae, beneficiary deployment statistics, funding sources as well as budgets were obtained and reviewed.

Purposive sampling was conducted to select key stakeholders such as the past three Ministers for Youth and Sports, and the Auditor- General whose expert knowledge and opinion on the programme was sought. On the other hand, a stratified random sampling was conducted to select beneficiaries of modules to interview. . It is important to note that very little actual contact data for beneficiaries was easily accessible.

During the meetings and field visits for primary data collection, perception based rankings were used to obtain additional information. The perception-based ratings were done on a ten (10) point scale. . Interview guides (Annexes c, d, e, f) were prepared and utilized for the interviews and discussions to collect comparable data for analysis. For the purpose of analysis, self-assessment information from GYEEDA staff and data provided by SPs was triangulated against data from beneficiaries and the secondary data available. Key issues that cut across any two groups and the secondary data were picked for discussion. This approach was utilized to collect sufficient and adequate qualitative and quantitative data for analysis as well as to facilitate triangulation of key information. Care has been taken to give a fair assessment that reflects the strengths and weaknesses of GYEEDA and its impact.