NCJ Number
53776
Date Published
1977
Length
18 pages
Annotation
IMPORTANT ISSUES IN THE DESIGN AND SELECTION OF EVALUATION FORMATS ARE DISCUSSED. A TYPOLOGY OF EVALUATION FORMS, A REVIEW OF CURRENT EVALUATION EFFORTS, AND A DISCUSSION OF LEAA ROLES ARE PRESENTED.
Abstract
THE PAPER TREATS THREE TOPICS: (1) A GENERAL TYPOLOGY FOR EVALUATION FORMS; (2) A REVIEW OF A FEW CURRENT EVALUATION EFFORTS UNDERWAY WHICH BRING ATTENTION TO SOME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT PITFALLS IN EVALUATION RESEARCH; AND (3) A DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE ROLES FOR LEAA IN ENCOURAGING MORE EFFECTIVE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL EVALUATION EFFORTS. THE MAJOR CATEGORIES OF EVALUATION QUESTIONS FALL UNDER SEVEN HEADINGS. THE FIRST TWO, APPROPRIATENESS AND ADEQUACY, INVOLVE SOME ARBITRARY DECISIONS. THE REMAINING FIVE ARE RELATIVELY MORE OBJECTIVE. THE FIVE ARE CATEGORIZED AS FOLLOWS: (1) EFFORT EVALUATION, (2) EFFICIENCY EVALUATION, (3) EFFECT EVALUATION, (4) IMPACT EVALUATION, AND (5) PROCESS EVALUATION. AN EXAMINATION OF THE PITFALLS THAT MANY CURRENT GRANT PROPOSALS FALL INTO REVEALS THREE COMMON PROBLEMS: (1) LACK OF ADEQUATE PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION, INCLUDING WHAT THE SPECIFIC AGENCY PROBLEM WAS, WHAT WAS ASSUMED TO BE ITS CAUSE, AND HOW THE GRANT APPLICATION RELATED TO A PROPOSED SOLUTION; (2) INADEQUATE DEFINITION OF DATA COLLECTION NECESSARY TO EFFECTIVELY CONCLUDE THE EVALUATION EFFORT, OR LITTLE HOPE OF COLLECTING RELEVANT DATA; AND (3) A CONFUSION OF OUTPUT AND OUTCOME EVALUATION AND A POOR UNDERSTANDING OF THE REASONS AND GOALS IN UNDERTAKING EVALUATION IN THE FIRST PLACE. A NEW ROLE FOR LEAA IN EVALUATION IS PROPOSED. A THREE-STEP APPROACH IS SUGGESTED: (1) LEAA NEEDS TO DEFINE AND DISSEMINATE A MODEL TECHNOLOGY FOR AGENCY PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION; (2) LEAA NEEDS TO ASSIST STATE PLANNING AGENCIES IN UNDERSTANDING AND APPLYING THIS TECHNOLOGY; AND (3) LEAA NEEDS TO REQUIRE THAT STATE PLANNING AGENCY FUNDED PROJECTS FOCUS MINIMAL EVALUATION OF PROJECT SUCCESS IN TERMS OF DEALING WITH STATE ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEMS. NOTES INCLUDE REFERENCES. (MLC)