prgram evaluation video
Program
evaluation and improvement
Program evaluation is an essential organizational
practice in social programs. However, it is not practice consistently across
program areas, nor is it sufficiently well-integrated into the day-to-day
management of most programs.
Effective program evaluation is a systematic way to
improve and account for public health and social service actions by involving
procedures that are useful, feasible, ethical, and accurate.
The author provides a framework, which is composed
of six steps that must be taken into account for any evaluation.
Step 1: Engage stakeholders
Step 2: Describe that program
Step 3: Focus the evaluation design
Step 4: Gather credible evidence
Step 5: Justify conclusion
Step 6: Ensure use and share lessons learned
Stakeholders must be engaged in the inquiry to
ensure that their perspectives are understood. When stakeholders are not
engaged, an evaluation might not address important elements of a program’s
objectives, operations, and outcomes.
Program descriptions convey the mission and
objectives of the program being evaluated. Descriptions should be sufficiently
detailed to ensure understanding of program goals and strategies.
The evaluation must be focused to assess the issues
of greatest concern to stakeholders while using time and resources as
efficiently as possible
An evaluation should strive to collect information
that will convey a well-rounded picture of the program so that the information
is seen as credible by the evaluation’ primary users.
The evaluation conclusions are justified when they
are linked to the evidence gathered and judged against agreed-upon values or
standards set by the stakeholders.
Deliberate effort is needed to ensure that the
evaluation processes and findings are used and disseminated appropriately.
One of the most significant
benefits that a program evaluation communicates is the need to make
improvements.
Examples of the types of improvements that an
evaluation may reveal could include:
·
The elimination of program services and
activities that do not achieve program outcomes
·
The addition of other services and
activities that are better designed to achieve outcomes
·
Acquiring more adequate resources to
support program services and activities
·
Target a different group of participants
to receive program services because there are an inadequate number of specified
participants available to receive services
These and/or other types of program improvements
that are revealed by the evaluation findings should be viewed and communicated
as an opportunity to make the program better.
How have you used the CDC framework in your line of work to evaluate something?
What other frameworks to find to be more effective then this particular framework?
What are some possible ways in which you can engage stakeholders?
What important factors can you take away from the youtube video link posted?
Reference:
Posavac EJ, Carey RG. Program evaluation: methods
and case studies. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.
Eddy DM. Performance measurement: problems and
solutions. Health Aff 1998;17(4):7-25.
No comments:
Post a Comment