7 results match your criteria American Journal Of Evaluation[Journal]

  • Page 1 of 1

Twinning "Practices of Change" With "Theory of Change": Room for Emergence in Advocacy Evaluation.

Am J Eval 2018 Jun 1;39(2):221-236. Epub 2017 Sep 1.

Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Theory of change (ToC) is currently approach for the evaluation and planning of international development programs. This approach is considered especially suitable for complex interventions. We question this assumption and argue that ToC's focus on cause-effect logic and intended outcomes does not do justice to the recursive nature of complex interventions such as advocacy. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214017727364DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6377054PMC

Using the Contribution Analysis Approach to Evaluate Science Impact: A Case Study of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Am J Eval 2018 29;2018. Epub 2018 Apr 29.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Interest from Congress, executive branch leadership, and various other stakeholders for greater accountability in government continues to gain momentum today with government-wide efforts. However, measuring the impact of research programs has proven particularly difficult. Cause and effect linkages between research findings and changes to morbidity and mortality are difficult to prove. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214018767046DOI Listing

Audit Culture: Unintended Consequences of Accountability Practices in Evidence-Based Programs.

Am J Eval 2016 Sep 4;37(3):326-343. Epub 2015 Sep 4.

Center for AIDS Intervention Research, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Evaluation has become expected within the nonprofit sector, including HIV prevention service delivery through community-based organizations (CBOs). While staff and directors at CBOs may acknowledge the potential contribution of evaluation data to the improvement of agency services, the results of evaluation are often used to demonstrate fiscal prudence, efficiency, and accountability to funders and the public, rather than to produce information for the organization's benefit. We conducted 22 in-depth, semistructured interviews with service providers from four agencies implementing the same evidence-based HIV prevention intervention. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214015603502DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5627606PMC
September 2016
1 Read

Adaptive Interventions and SMART Designs: Application to child behavior research in a community setting.

Am J Eval 2016 Sep 11;37(3):344-363. Epub 2015 Dec 11.

Department of Psychology, Center for Human Growth and Development, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.

Heterogeneity between and within people necessitates the need for sequential personalized interventions to optimize individual outcomes. Personalized or adaptive interventions (AIs) are relevant for diseases and maladaptive behavioral trajectories when one intervention is not curative and success of a subsequent intervention may depend on individual characteristics or response. AIs may be applied to medical settings and to investigate best prevention, education, and community-based practices. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214015617013DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5321198PMC
September 2016
1 Read

NIH Peer Review: Scored Review Criteria and Overall Impact.

Am J Eval 2016 Jun 29;37(2):238-249. Epub 2015 Apr 29.

Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA; Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Research and Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign 61820.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the largest source of funding for biomedical research in the world. Funding decisions are made largely based on the outcome of a peer review process that is intended to provide a fair, equitable, timely, and unbiased review of the quality, scientific merit, and potential impact of the research. There have been concerns about the criteria reviewers are using, and recent changes in review procedures at the NIH now make it possible to conduct an analysis of how reviewers evaluate applications for funding. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214015582049DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882120PMC
June 2016
1 Read

Evaluating a moving target: Using Practical Participatory Evaluation (P-PE) in hospital settings.

Am J Eval 2013 Sep;34(3):402-412

Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Mobility Research Center ; Institute of Gerontology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA ; VA Ann Arbor Health Care System Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Ann Arbor, Michigan.

This article describes lessons learned about implementing evaluations in hospital settings. In order to overcome the methodological dilemmas inherent in this environment, we used a practical participatory evaluation strategy to engage as many stakeholders as possible in the process of evaluating a clinical demonstration project. Demonstration projects, in this context, push the envelope about what is known about effectiveness in novel settings, and turnover of staff and patient populations can present challenges to gathering optimal data. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214013477728DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4029427PMC
September 2013

A Comparison of Participant and Practitioner Beliefs About Evaluation.

Am J Eval 2012 Jun;33(2):208-220

Washington State University, Grays Harbor, WA, USA.

The move to build capacity for internal evaluation is a common organizational theme in social service delivery, and in many settings, the evaluator is also the practitioner who delivers the service. The goal of the present study was to extend our limited knowledge of practitioner evaluation. Specifically, the authors examined practitioner concerns about administering pretest and posttest evaluations within the context of a multisite 7-week family strengthening program and compared those concerns with self-reported attitudes of the parents who completed evaluations. Read More

View Article

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214011423803DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4198306PMC
June 2012
2 Reads
  • Page 1 of 1