Considerations for Evaluating Evolving Organizations and Initiatives
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Evaluators are often called to be flexible in response to changing programmatic and contextual circumstances. However, the field offers little guidance around issues to consider before modifying an in-progress evaluation.
Purpose: This article describes the evaluation of an organization that underwent significant mid-evaluation changes, with a focus on factors that went into the evaluator’s recommendations about whether to modify evaluation design and instrumentation.
Setting: Community collaborative in Wake County, North Carolina
Intervention: NA
Research Design: NA
Data Collection and Analysis: The evaluator noted factors that went in to decisions about modifying evaluation design and instrumentation.
Findings: Issues around validity and sustainability push evaluators to update our evaluation designs to keep pace with changes, whereas issues around continuity and accountability pull us to back to the current course.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Introduction to program evaluation for public health programs: A self-study guide. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/eval/guide/
Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hembroff, L., Perlstadt, H., Henry, R. C., Hogan, A. J., Weissert, C. S., Bland, C. J., . . . Starnaman, S. M. (1999). When (not if) evaluation flexibility is desirable: Examples from the CPHPE initiative. Evaluation & The Health Professions, 22, 325-341. https://doi.org/10.1177/01632789922034338 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01632789922034338
McKenna, C. (1983). Evaluation for accountability. Journal of Extension, 2(9/10), 22-26.
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2003). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (2010). Handbook of practical program evaluation (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Youth Thrive. (2015). Wake County youth well-being profile.
Youth Thrive. (2016). Wake County strategic planning blueprint.