‘Improvement focused’ evaluation of place-based initiatives: An examination of three methodologies

Author:

Heery Lauren1,Naccarella Lucio,McKenzie Rosemary2

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Community Child Health, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Australia

2. Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia

Abstract

Place-based initiatives offer a comprehensive, whole-of-community approach to solving complex problems. Impact evaluation of complex initiatives is challenging and alternative ‘improvement focused’ methodologies, such as developmental evaluation, action research and quality improvement, are being used. Limited understanding exists about how these methodologies work when used in place-based initiatives, which contexts they are individually best suited to and what they can achieve. This article examines the methodologies of developmental evaluation, action research and quality improvement when applied to the evaluation of place-based initiatives. The approach used a realist evaluation methodology, involving a 10-year literature review and three ‘instrumental’ case studies, which is described in detail in an accompanying paper (Heery, Naccarella & McKenzie, 2018). Contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes for the application of developmental evaluation, action research and quality improvement to place-based evaluation were identified so as to build a theory for each methodology. The three methodologies have similar mechanisms; they are cyclical and comprise planning, doing, studying and acting, and all result in continuous improvement of the initiatives, increasing collaboration and increasing evaluation capacity. A key difference between the methodologies is their perceived purpose. These findings can support practitioners, commissioners and users of evaluation working in the place-based arena in three ways: advocating for the adoption of ‘improvement focused’ evaluation; selecting the most appropriate ‘improvement focused’ methodology; and identifying and addressing the facilitating factors particular to the selected methodology to increase the effectiveness of the evaluation.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Sociology and Political Science,Development

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3