IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v31y2008i4p347-355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Faith-based evaluation: Accountable to whom, for what?

Author

Listed:
  • O'Connor, Mary Katherine
  • Netting, F. Ellen

Abstract

Findings, issues, and lessons learned about program evaluation are examined from a national qualitative study of 15 faith-based human service programs targeting those in need in urban areas. Using a grounded theory design, five properties emerge as part of the evaluation network: (1) philosophy of accountability, (2) legitimacy, (3) evaluation design, (4) feedback loop, and (5) barriers to evaluation. While funders expect measurable outcomes to evaluate service effectiveness, respondents acknowledge other competing expectations of multiple constituents in religious and secular communities. What emerges is an excellent example of managing multiple program evaluation demands in programs that are particularly facile at process evaluation in the interest of quality service and relationship building. The article concludes with important lessons learned about the process of program evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • O'Connor, Mary Katherine & Netting, F. Ellen, 2008. "Faith-based evaluation: Accountable to whom, for what?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 347-355, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:4:p:347-355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(08)00047-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christie, Christina A. & Montrosse, Bianca E. & Klein, Brock M., 2005. "Emergent design evaluation: A case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 271-277, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Janzen, Rich & Ochocka, Joanna & Turner, Leanne & Cook, Tabitha & Franklin, Michelle & Deichert, Debbie, 2017. "Building a community-based culture of evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 163-170.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anzoise, Valentina & Sardo, Stefania, 2016. "Dynamic systems and the role of evaluation: The case of the Green Communities project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 162-172.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:4:p:347-355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.