1 / 23

Evaluation

Evaluation. Assists with allocating resources what is working how things can work better. Effective Evaluations. ID strategies/initiatives working best Provide feedback for decision making Show cost-effectiveness of different strategies Increase ability to manage projects/programs.

mgill
Download Presentation

Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation • Assists with allocating resources • what is working • how things can work better

  2. Effective Evaluations • ID strategies/initiatives working best • Provide feedback for decision making • Show cost-effectiveness of different strategies • Increase ability to manage projects/programs

  3. Why Evaluate? • To determine effectiveness • understand or verify impact of service, program, product • To assess efficiency • ensuring optimal use of time & resources • To be accountable • account for what has been accomplished through project funding • To identify ways to improve a program • Improving usefulness of the program or service • Determining what works & doesn’t (strengths & weaknesses) • Determining if program is meeting needs of participants

  4. Types of Evaluation • Formative • Information you collect to help you plan or implement a program/service • Needs assessment • Feasibility assessment • Pre-testing program elements • Audience analysis

  5. Types of Evaluation • Process • Assesses aspects of program activities • On-going process – feedback for decision making along the way • Tracking quantity & type of service • Tracking people reached (# and type) • Participant satisfaction (e.g., quality of service) • PIE focus • Perfect, Improve, Eliminate

  6. Types of Evaluation • Impact • Whether & to what extent a program has accomplished stated goals & objectives

  7. Fiscal or Efficiency Evaluation • Compares • costs -- economic resources consumed by program • WITH • consequences -- to health effects or outcomes

  8. Fiscal EvaluationCost-Benefit Analysis • Compares • cost in $$ • economic benefits/consequences in units of currency • For every $1 spent on preschool program, there are $7 in benefits through reduced societal costs

  9. Fiscal Evaluation – Cost-Effectiveness Analysis • Compares: • costs in monetary units -- $$ • health effects in units of mortality, morbidity, health status measure • Costs $x to prevent one infant death from diarrheal disease by supporting breastfeeding

  10. Fiscal EvaluationCost-Utility Analysis • Compares • cost in $$ • consequences in health terms as utilities or the preference/desire for a specific outcome • Compare costs and outcomes of interventions • Cost $x to avoid one case of diarrheal disease through oral rehydration or clean water supply

  11. Steps in Evaluation • DESCRIBE/CLARIFY YOUR PROGRAM • Engage stakeholders • Assess resources • DESIGN THE EVALUATION • Determine evaluation methods • Collect the data • Process and analyze the data • Interpret and disseminate the results • TAKE ACTION • Who conducts evaluation?

  12. Evaluation Framework • Provides a plan that links the activities (implementation objectives) and outcomes (outcome objectives) with your evaluation questions, indicators, data sources and data collection methods • Evaluation questions directly reflect program’s implementation and/or outcome objectives.

  13. Evaluation Framework • Indicators • What are the specific measures indicating you have achieved your objectives? • How will you know if you accomplished your objectives? • What would be a success? • Sources • Who can provide information about this? • Where can you get the information? • Tools • What is/are the best way(s) to gather information/find out from people?

  14. Evaluation Framework

  15. Measurement Indicators • Outcome Indicators • measures for your outcomes • Short-term • Improved access • Improved collaboration • Policy changes • Changes in awareness, knowledge or beliefs • Longer term • Service utilization • Morbidity/mortality • Health status

  16. Measurement Indicators • Process Indicators • Measures for how program delivered • Training sessions held • Type of staff • Staff activities and time • Resources distributed • Participation • Client Satisfaction

  17. Program Logic Model • A diagrammatic representation of a program • Depicts relationships between program activities, outputs & outcomes • Describes a program to stakeholders • clarifies how the program is structured • Shows how different facets of a program are linked • Integrates program planning & evaluation • Facilitates the assessment of the feasibility of program activities achieving program objectives

  18. Program Logic Model – CAT SOLO • Components – Closely related groups of activities in your program • Activities– describe what you are going to do & provide (implementation strategies) • Target – describes who you are trying to reach • Outcomes – describe impacts on the customers, clients, organizations, systems (short and long-term outcomes)

  19. Program Logic Model – CAT SOLO Components Activities Target Short-term Outcomes Long-term Outcomes

  20. Communicating Evaluation Findings • Communicate info to potential users • Ensure report addresses issues users perceive as important • Ensure timely delivery • Ensure format easily understood by users

  21. Communicating Evaluation Findings • Include copies of survey tools • Summarize computer printouts in table format

  22. Potential Users of Evaluation Results • Immediate Supervisor • Senior Management/Boards of Directors • Policymakers • Funding agencies • Peers in similar programs • Client base/Community • Program personnel

  23. Communicating Evaluation Findings: Figure 4-4, p. 123

More Related