Another major concept derived from the literature is the fact that evaluation is more a process than a "one shot deal". Instead of being a stage in a project (usually done post project) it is most effective if treated as a parallel and dynamic process within the project itself. Jiggins speaks to this when she states: "while the development agency tends to see impact assessment as the crowning activity of a linear process and of an investment of limited duration, development practitioners tend to see monitoring, evaluation, and impact assessment as codependent, iterative and cyclic" (1995: 48).

Bietz (pers. comm. 1995) also emphasized this point. He stated that evaluation is an on-going process within rural communities themselves, yet is often not recognized as such by (external) evaluation practitioners. For example, a community-appointed rural committee which meets once a year to discuss resource issues is basically an evaluation team undergoing periods of self-reflection. In this sense, evaluation is an on-going, parallel process which is indeed codependent, iterative and cyclic. Therefore, communities most likely possess evaluation techniques and skills already; an evaluation might be made more effective, context specific and valid if these community skills can be tapped into.