Instructions for authors

Authorship and responsibility

Everyone listed as an author must have made a meaningful contribution to the article and must accept responsibility for the relevant parts of the work. Authorship should be based on all four of the following criteria:

1. a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the collection, analysis or interpretation of information;
2. drafting the article or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
3. approving the final version for publication; and
4. agreeing to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

Authors should agree on their order before submission. Any later addition, removal or change in the order of authors must be approved by all authors and explained to the editor in writing. A group submission must identify one corresponding author.

Originality, evidence and disclosure

A submission must be the authors’ original work and must not have been published, or be under consideration, elsewhere in substantially the same form. Authors must be able to document the sources and evidence on which their conclusions are based and, when reasonably requested, provide supporting data for editorial review.

All financial or material support and any relevant conflicts of interest must be disclosed. Authors should also explain any role played by a funder or sponsor in the design, analysis, drafting or decision to submit the article.

Preparing your submission

• Write for an informed, non-specialist audience and explain technical terms where necessary.
• Use a clear title and include an abstract of no more than 50 words.
• State the question or issue, why it matters, the method or evidence used, the principal findings and the practical implications.
• Use APA style for references and citations.
• Provide each author’s full name, academic qualification, institutional affiliation and the corresponding author’s email address.
• Submit images, charts and figures in JPEG or PNG format at a minimum width of 540 pixels. Where possible, also provide the underlying data used to produce charts.
• Supplementary links are welcome when they lead to relevant evidence and do not primarily serve advertising or project-visibility purposes.

Article formats

Research or evaluation brief

A concise report of original research or evaluation. Maximum length: 800 words, excluding references; abstract: up to 50 words; up to three tables or figures; up to six references; and no more than five authors. A typical structure is: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Findings, Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations.

Special report

An evidence-based examination of an important issue in socioeconomic development, public investment, budgets, strategies, plans or sectoral policy. Maximum length: 1,000 words, excluding references; abstract: up to 50 words; up to three tables or figures; up to six references; and no more than two authors.

Review or commentary

A focused and clearly argued discussion of an important public, professional or social issue. Recommended length: 500–1,000 words; up to two tables or figures; up to five references; and no more than three authors.

My View

A personal perspective grounded in substantial professional or development experience. Maximum length: 400 words.

Letter to the editor

A response to a recently published eVAL article. Maximum length: 200 words; up to five references, including the article being discussed; and no more than three authors. Letters should be evidence-based, must not duplicate published material and should not introduce unverifiable data. The authors of the original article may be invited to reply.

Submission and editorial review

Send a proposal or completed manuscript to edit@elval.org. The editorial team first assesses relevance, originality, clarity, the appropriateness of the method, the quality of the evidence and whether the conclusions are supported. Submissions may be declined, returned for revision, shortened or edited for style and clarity.

Information about a manuscript under review is treated as confidential and shared only with the people involved in the editorial process.

After acceptance

Authors may be asked to complete an authorship declaration and publishing agreement. Edited text is returned to the corresponding author for approval. Authors remain responsible for all statements in the published article, including changes they approve during editing.

eVAL publishes accepted articles online with free public access. Requests for corrections should be sent to edit@elval.org; approved corrections will be linked to the original article.