Lessons learned about collaborative evaluation using the Capacity for Applying Project Evaluation (CAPE) framework with school and district leaders

Corn, Jenifer O.; Byrom, Elizabeth; Knestis, Kirk; Matzen, Nita J.; Thrift, Beth

doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.12.008

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Internal and external evaluations can be combined in numerous ways (Corn et al, 2012; Mutch, 2012; O’Sullivan, 2012)—broadly classified as hierarchical or polycentric evaluations (Schoenefeld and Jordan, 2017)—to create a multilevel evaluation framework. The factors influencing this choice include the purpose of evaluation, the values of the organization, and the cultural competence of the evaluator, organizational complexity, and the ‘stakes’ of the evaluation (Menestrel et al, 2014; Vanhoof and Petegem, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining internal and external evaluations within a multilevel evaluation framework: Computational text analysis of lessons from the Asian Development Bank

Goyal

Howlett

2019

Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the literature on evaluation has theorized about the distinction between internal and external evaluation, hardly any research has compared them empirically. This article examines whether the lessons of internal evaluations differed from those of external evaluations in the case of international development aid. It analyzes internal evaluations of the Asian Development Bank for nearly 1000 sovereign interventions across 38 countries in the Asia-Pacific during 1996–2016, using computational text analysis or text mining techniques. The results show that internal evaluations focused more on micro- and meso-level characteristics, while external evaluations laid more emphasis on meso- and macro-level constructs, such as dimensions of policy and the institutional environment in the recipient country, or its level and rate of economic growth. The article concludes that internal and external evaluations can be combined to create a multilevel evaluation framework that integrates micro-, meso-, and macro-level lessons to facilitate better learning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining internal and external evaluations within a multilevel evaluation framework: Computational text analysis of lessons from the Asian Development Bank

Goyal

Howlett

2019

Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fourth, a remarkable feature of the project evaluation literature is the total absence of the consideration of non-humansobjects, artifacts, raw materials and their materiality, conceptual devices and calculative devices among others. That is, while the conventional approach on project evaluation has focused on how do humans develop/drive/affect/impact the project evaluation process, there has been little research on how the materiality of non-humans impact/drive/constrain/support project evaluation processes ( for exceptions see Khan et al, 2013;Corn et al, 2012;Alderman and Ivory, 2011). Some open research questions in this respect include: RQ1.…”

Section: Understanding Project Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stakeholder engagement throughout the evaluation process decreases potential challenges and issues and helps to improve project outcomes. Cooperation and collaboration between the project's key stakeholders and evaluation team is key for a comprehensive project evaluation (Khan et al, 2013;Corn et al, 2012;Molenaar et al, 2012). Albeit, it is naive to think that pluralistic stakeholders, with diverse aims and agendas, will voluntarily collaborate with the examination of their work, especially if some stakeholders support the project and others are against it (Courpasson et al, 2012).…”

Section: Stakeholders Engagement In Project Evaluation Is Necessary But Problematicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding project evaluation – a review and reconceptualization

Haass

Guzman

2019

IJMPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand the underlying logics applied by different project evaluation approaches and to propose an alternative research agenda. Design/methodology/approach This paper explores the project evaluation literature via conducting a qualitative research applying systematic literature review and thematic analysis. Findings The project evaluation literature has mainly concentrated on the objective aspects of project evaluation and overlooked the subjective aspects that reflect the temporal, dynamic, complex and subjective nature of today’s projects. The authors propose a meta-framework that helps project practitioners to select an appropriate project evaluation criterion for their projects by considering the strengths and limitations of their preferred project evaluation model as well as making project evaluators aware of the underlying logics associated to diverse project evaluation approaches. Research limitations/implications This study suggests that new conceptual approaches to deal with some of the major challenges in the project evaluation field. Practice-based views, narrative analysis and actor-network theory are likely to be useful tools to better understand and cope with the projects’ uncertainty and complexity. Practical implications The findings of this research assist project management practitioners and particularly project evaluators to enhance their understanding of the subjectivity, complexity and dynamics of current projects. To increase the reflexivity and resilience of project evaluation practice, this study also proposes new directions to apply different criteria, sub-criteria and indicators to the evaluation practice. Originality/value The originality of this study relies on transcending the conventional objective and rational approaches prevailing in current project evaluation practices. It proposes a research agenda that pave the way to address the shortcomings of conventional project evaluation practice.

show abstract

Strategies for Evaluating Collective Impact Initiatives: Lessons Learned from a Community-Academic Partnership

DeZelar,

Burns,

Rosania

et al. 2024

American Journal of Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collective impact (CI) initiatives provide a promising collaborative community-based approach for addressing health disparities, but they are challenging to evaluate. This paper provides a detailed strategy for addressing these challenges through a case study, with the goal of not only of evaluating the CI, but also putting organizations in a position to implement and maintain sustainable self-evaluation efforts over time. A three-phase evaluation strategy was developed and implemented via a community-academic partnership to assess the impact of the CI. Process and outcome data from a CI to address health disparities in a Chicago community were collected and analyzed. The evaluation strategy, following the developmental, formative, and summative phases, helped a CI overcome barriers and build capacity for ongoing evaluative work for its members. Considering the flexible, low-technology approach, this strategy is a valuable resource in assisting individuals seeking to create a successful and sustainable CI evaluation.

show abstract

Lessons learned about collaborative evaluation using the Capacity for Applying Project Evaluation (CAPE) framework with school and district leaders

Cited by 3 publications

References 2 publications

Combining internal and external evaluations within a multilevel evaluation framework: Computational text analysis of lessons from the Asian Development Bank

Combining internal and external evaluations within a multilevel evaluation framework: Computational text analysis of lessons from the Asian Development Bank

Understanding project evaluation – a review and reconceptualization

Strategies for Evaluating Collective Impact Initiatives: Lessons Learned from a Community-Academic Partnership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About