IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v43y2014icp64-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developmental evaluation and the ‘Stronger Economies Together’ initiative in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Honadle, Beth Walter
  • Zapata, Marisa A.
  • Auffrey, Christopher
  • vom Hofe, Rainer
  • Looye, Johanna

Abstract

This article describes a developmental evaluation and explains its impact on the Stronger Economies Together (SET) initiative of the U.S. Department of Agriculture in collaboration with the Nation's four Regional Rural Development Centers and Land-Grant universities. Through a dynamic process, this evaluation of the early phases of an initiative led to continuous program alterations based on feedback. The relationship of the evaluation team to the initiative's coordinating team enabled seamless transfer of observations, suggestions, and recommendations to decision makers. The multidisciplinary character of the evaluation team provided a diverse set of perspectives with a depth of subject matter and knowledge from relevant fields. One lesson is that developmental evaluators must be flexible, nimble, creative, and adaptive. When expected data are imperfect or nonexistent, the team must collect alternate information and make recommendations to improve data collection. As the initiative proceeded and modifications came about, the evaluation team had to recognize the changes in the program and focus on different questions. This experience with developmental evaluation provides insights into how interdisciplinary teams may need to change course and conduct a developmental evaluation when a formative evaluation was originally envisioned.

Suggested Citation

  • Honadle, Beth Walter & Zapata, Marisa A. & Auffrey, Christopher & vom Hofe, Rainer & Looye, Johanna, 2014. "Developmental evaluation and the ‘Stronger Economies Together’ initiative in the United States," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 64-72.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:43:y:2014:i:c:p:64-72
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718913001043
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.11.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Honadle, Beth Walter, 2001. "Rural Development Policy in the United States: Beyond the Cargo Cult Mentality," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 31(2), pages 1-16.
    2. Beth Walter Honadle, 1993. "Rural Development Policy: Breaking the Cargo Cult Mentality," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 7(3), pages 227-236, August.
    3. Brown, J. Lynne & Kiernan, Nancy Ellen, 2001. "Assessing the subsequent effect of a formative evaluation on a program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 129-143, May.
    4. Beth Walter Honadle, 2011. "Rural development policy in the United States: a critical analysis and lessons from the “still birth” of the rural collaborative investment program," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 56-69, January.
    5. Cherniss, Cary & Fishman, Daniel B., 2004. "The Mesquite `MicroSociety' school: identifying organizational factors that facilitate successful adoption of an innovative program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 79-88, February.
    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. Chapman, S.A. & Goodman, S. & Jawitz, J. & Deacon, A., 2016. "A strategy for monitoring and evaluating massive open online courses," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 55-63.
    2. Shea, Jennifer & Taylor, Tory, 2017. "Using developmental evaluation as a system of organizational learning: An example from San Francisco," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 84-93.

    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. Lederer, Alyssa M. & Foster, Allison M. & Schmidt, Norine & Gomes, Gérard R. & Scott, Glenis & Watson, Shannon & Kissinger, Patricia J., 2023. "A framework for using real-time evaluative interview feedback for health promotion program and evaluation improvement: The Check It case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Freshwater, David, 2007. "Rural Development and the Declining Coherence of Rural Policy: An American and Canadian Perspective," Staff Papers 42314, University of Kentucky, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    3. Al-Yaseen, Hussein & Eldabi, Tillal & Lees, David Y. & Paul, Ray J., 2006. "Operational Use evaluation of IT investments: An investigation into potential benefits," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(3), pages 1000-1011, September.
    4. Fishman, Daniel B. & Neigher, William D., 2004. "Publishing systematic, pragmatic case studies in program evaluation: collatoral on a `promisory note'," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 105-113, February.
    5. repec:rre:publsh:v:40:y:2010:i:1:p:71-97 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:43:y:2014:i:c:p:64-72. 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.