IMPROVING THE UTILIZATION OF EVALUATION FINDINGS WORKING PANEL 3 (FROM USE OF EVALUATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES - PROCEEDINGS OF A SYMPOSIUM, 1977, BY ELEANOR CHELIMSKY - SEE NCJ-49572)

• NCJ Number: 49585
• Author(s): B G EWING
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 10 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Northwest Missouri Regional Planning Cmssn; US Dept of Justice
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

AN EVALUATION SYMPOSIUM WORKING PANEL'S DELIBERATIONS ON WAYS TO IMPROVE FEDERAL AGENCIES' USE OF EVALUATION FINDINGS ARE SUMMARIZED.

Abstract

THE PANEL CONSIDERED THREE ASPECTS OF EVALUATION USE AND USABILITY: (1) THE USER, OR AUDIENCE; (2) THE KINDS OF INFORMATION NEEDED BY THE USER; AND (3) THE CONDITIONS THAT STIMULATE OR IMPEDE THE USE OF EVALUATION FINDINGS. THE PANEL DECIDED THAT THE PRIMARY AUDIENCE OF AN EVALUATION DEPENDS ON WHO NEEDED THE EVALUATION AND ON THE CHARACTER AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION, BUT THAT EVALUATORS SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT NOT ALL USERS OF THEIR FINDINGS ARE TO BE FOUND IN FEDERAL AGENCIES. POSSIBLE CONFLICTS AMONG THE NEEDS OF DIFFERENT USERS--AGENCIES, CONGRESS, FEDERAL POLICYMAKERS, LOCAL PRACTITIONERS--WERE CONSIDERED. THE GROUP AGREED THAT THE EXTENT TO WHICH EVALUATION FINDINGS ARE USED DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE RIGHT QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED, AND THAT IT IS OFTEN DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ARE. THE NEED FOR A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF EVALUATION ON THE PART OF DECISIONMAKERS, OR AT LEAST FOR MECHANISMS OF LIAISON BETWEEN EVALUATORS AND DECISIONMAKERS, WAS BROUGHT OUT. THE PANEL MODERATOR FELT STRONGLY THAT FOR AN EVALUATION TO PROVE USEFUL IT MUST BE RELIABLE, BRIEF, TIMELY, COMPREHENSIBLE, AND CONCLUSIVE (AT LEAST ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS ADDRESSED). THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE DISAGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT HELPS OR HINDERS THE USE OF EVALUATION FINDINGS. THE PANEL'S BASIC CONCLUSIONS WERE THE FOLLOWING: (1) BEFORE THEY START A PROJECT, EVALUATORS SHOULD MAKE CERTAIN THAT SOMEBODY NEEDS THE INFORMATION THEY INTEND TO PRODUCE; (2) EVALUATORS SHOULD BE AGGRESSIVE ABOUT 'SELLING THEIR WARES' TO DECISIONMAKERS; (3) A MIX OF SHORT-TERM ANALYSES, LONG-TERM INQUIRIES, ASSESSMENT, DISCIPLINED JUDGMENT, AND RESEARCH SEEMS NECESSARY IF EVALUATION IS TO SURVIVE AS AN IDENTIFIABLE FUNCTION; AND (4) THERE NEEDS TO BE GREATER CLARITY ABOUT WHAT IS BEING PROMISED BY EVALUATORS AND EVALUATIONS--WHAT A GIVEN EVALUATION WILL DO, WHOM IT WILL SERVE, THE QUESTIONS IT CAN ANSWER. (LKM)