Distinctive features of evaluation research

Evaluation research differs from question-answering research in five important ways:

• Having a practical purpose — to provide practical information for measuring the effects of a program, policy, or some other activity;
• Conducted as sponsored research — most evaluations are sponsored by an organization that wants the results for use in making a decision about a program or policy;
• Having the potential for conflict — evaluation researchers are frequently caught in conflict among parties who have different views on the value or success of the program or service being evaluated;
• Being a team effort — evaluation research is often based on a team effort as opposed to research carried out by a single investigator; and
• Producing less precise results — results of evaluation research are often less precise than expected from other social research.

Done for a practical purpose

The Ugandan study also illustrates how evaluation research differs from other research. Sponsors of the program wanted evaluation data for assessing its impact on knowledge about HIV. In response, the research team designed an evaluation to produce the information on the outcomes of the program: Did it achieve the objectives set for it? Outcomes were measured by the extent the program increased knowledge about the transmission of HIV and led to changes in sexual behavior that would help slow the spread of the disease.

Measuring the outcome of a program is referred to as summative evaluation. This kind of evaluation is conducted when a program is considered mature or is completed. In the Ugandan example, the program was planned for two years. At the end of this period, a summative evaluation was conducted. Programs can also be evaluated while they are being developed. Using the Ugandan example, again, the investigators could have conducted interviews at certain points in the development of the program and then used the results to make improvements in the program. This kind of evaluation is called formative evaluation.  

Both kinds of evaluation can be applied to the same program. Program managers may arrange for continuous monitoring of a program to provide feedback for modifying the program as it is being developed. At the end of the program, as in the Ugandan case, the sponsoring organization may conduct an evaluation to get information of the outcomes of the program. Formative evaluations generally are designed to provide feedback to staff and program managers, while summative evaluations are designed to give decision-makers information for use in deciding whether a program will be continued, modified, or terminated.  

Preformed as sponsored research

Individual researchers on their own may conduct an evaluation of some program Most evaluations, however, are requested and paid for by an organization responsible for a given program. In preparing for budget decisions, government ministries may request evaluations of health, education, economic development, or other publicly-supported programs. Nongovernmental organizations frequently hire evaluators to assess the effects of programs the organizations support.

The Ugandan investigation described earlier illustrates the role of sponsoring organizations in evaluation of programs. Three organizations were involved in the evaluation. The program was developed and conducted by the Islamic Medical Association of Uganda, a non-governmental organization, in cooperation with an international nongovernmental organization, World Learning. The United States Agency for International Development, a governmental organization, provided the funds for the program and its evaluation.   As part of its conditions for supporting the program, USAID, as the sponsor, required an evaluation.

PREV       NEXT

---