IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v48y2015icp75-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relationship between involvement in and use of evaluation in multi-site evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Roseland, Denise
  • Lawrenz, Frances
  • Thao, Mao

Abstract

This research explores the relationship between participation in evaluation and the use of evaluation findings and processes within three large-scale multi-site evaluations. Using canonical correlation analysis and a collection of 20 interviews, this study describes and tests the relationship between these two critical conceptual powerhouses in evaluation. Using data that were collected as a part of the NSF-funded research Beyond Evaluation Use (Lawrenz & King, 2009), this study found that some theories and beliefs about participatory evaluation contribute to use and influence in similar ways as in single-site evaluations. The differences identified in this research highlight potential planning and implementation considerations that might allow multi-site evaluators and funders of multi-site evaluation to enhance use and influence of multi-site evaluations.

Suggested Citation

  • Roseland, Denise & Lawrenz, Frances & Thao, Mao, 2015. "The relationship between involvement in and use of evaluation in multi-site evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 75-82.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:48:y:2015:i:c:p:75-82
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.10.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718914001141
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.10.003?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. Toal, Stacie A. & King, Jean A. & Johnson, Kelli & Lawrenz, Frances, 2009. "The unique character of involvement in multi-site evaluation settings," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 91-98, May.
    2. Daigneault, Pierre-Marc, 2014. "Taking stock of four decades of quantitative research on stakeholder participation and evaluation use: A systematic map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 171-181.
    3. Patton, Michael Quinn & Horton, Douglas, 2008. "Utilization-focused evaluation for agricultural innovation," ILAC Briefs 52533, Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.
    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. Peterson, Christina & Skolits, Gary, 2020. "Value for money: A utilization-focused approach to extending the foundation and contribution of economic evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Evans, S. & Dadich, A. & Stout, B. & Plath, D., 2020. "Clarifying the role of belief-motive explanations in multi-stakeholder realist evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Schultes, Marie-Therese & Kollmayer, Marlene & Mejeh, Mathias & Spiel, Christiane, 2018. "Attitudes toward evaluation: An exploratory study of students’ and stakeholders’ social representations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 44-50.

    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. Daigneault, Pierre-Marc, 2014. "Taking stock of four decades of quantitative research on stakeholder participation and evaluation use: A systematic map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 171-181.
    2. Lifshitz, Chen Chana, 2017. "Fostering employability among youth at-risk in a multi-cultural context: Insights from a pilot intervention program," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 20-34.
    3. Kupiec, Tomasz, 2022. "Does evaluation quality matter? Quantitative analysis of the use of evaluation findings in the field of cohesion policy in Poland," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. Gullickson, Amy M. & King, Jean A. & LaVelle, John M. & Clinton, Janet M., 2019. "The current state of evaluator education: A situation analysis and call to action," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 20-30.
    5. Harman, Elena & Azzam, Tarek, 2018. "Incorporating public values into evaluative criteria: Using crowdsourcing to identify criteria and standards," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 68-82.
    6. Pleasant, Andrew & O’Leary, Catina & Carmona, Richard H., 2020. "Using formative research to tailor a community intervention focused on the prevention of chronic disease," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. Gagnon, France & Aubry, Tim & Cousins, J. Bradley & Goh, Swee C. & Elliott, Catherine, 2018. "Validation of the evaluation capacity in organizations questionnaire," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 166-175.
    8. Szijarto, Barbara & Milley, Peter & Svensson, Kate & Cousins, J. Bradley, 2018. "On the evaluation of social innovations and social enterprises: Recognizing and integrating two solitudes in the empirical knowledge base," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 20-32.
    9. Neumann, Jan & Robson, Andrew & Sloan, Diane, 2018. "Monitoring and evaluation of strategic change programme implementation—Lessons from a case analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 120-132.
    10. Alemdar, Meltem & Cappelli, Christopher J. & Criswell, Brett A. & Rushton, Gregory T., 2018. "Evaluation of a Noyce program: Development of teacher leaders in STEM education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-11.
    11. Bourgeois, Isabelle & Whynot, Jane, 2018. "The influence of evaluation recommendations on instrumental and conceptual uses: A preliminary analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 13-18.
    12. Healy, John & Hughes, Jeffrey & Donnelly-Cox, Gemma & Shantz, Amanda, 2024. "A long and winding road: The hard graft of scaling social change in complex systems," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    13. Kalpazidou Schmidt, Evanthia & Graversen, Ebbe Krogh, 2020. "Developing a conceptual evaluation framework for gender equality interventions in research and innovation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    14. Arasanz, Carla & Nylen, Kirk, 2020. "The theory of change of the evaluation support program: Enhancing the role of community organizations in providing an ecology of care for neurological disorders," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    15. Schalock, Robert L. & Lee, Tim & Verdugo, Miguel & Swart, Kees & Claes, Claudia & van Loon, Jos & Lee, Chun-Shin, 2014. "An evidence-based approach to organization evaluation and change in human service organizations evaluation and program planning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 110-118.
    16. Renger, Ralph & Foltysova, Jirina & Becker, Karin L. & Souvannasacd, Eric, 2015. "The power of the context map: Designing realistic outcome evaluation strategies and other unanticipated benefits," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 118-125.
    17. Rorrer, Audrey S., 2016. "An evaluation capacity building toolkit for principal investigators of undergraduate research experiences: A demonstration of transforming theory into practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 103-111.
    18. Abboud, Rida & Claussen, Caroline, 2016. "The use of Outcome Harvesting in learning-oriented and collaborative inquiry approaches to evaluation: An example from Calgary, Alberta," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 47-54.
    19. Miriam R. Jacobson & Tarek Azzam, 2016. "Methodological Credibility," Evaluation Review, , vol. 40(1), pages 29-60, February.
    20. repec:sae:envval:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:81-102 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Salabarría-Peña, Yamir & Robinson, William T., 2022. "Going beyond performance measures in HIV-prevention: A funder-recipient expedition," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    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:48:y:2015:i:c:p:75-82. 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.