IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v60y2017icp46-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating social exclusion interventions in university-community partnerships

Author

Listed:
  • Ofek, Yuval

Abstract

Most university-community partnerships (UCPs) involve elements of community-level social exclusion interventions. As such, they face substantial challenges in management and evaluation. This paper highlights the central challenges associated with evaluation of UCP and other social exclusion interventions at the community level, and suggests methods to overcome them. The main body of the paper presents a case study based on a four-year action research involving evaluation of a social exclusion intervention initiated and implemented by a UCP in Israel. The case study highlights the challenges faced by the evaluation team, the solutions provided, and the contribution of the evaluation to improvement and accountability.

Suggested Citation

  • Ofek, Yuval, 2017. "Evaluating social exclusion interventions in university-community partnerships," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 46-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:60:y:2017:i:c:p:46-55
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718916300167
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.09.004?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. Peter Shirlow & Brendan Murtagh, 2004. "Capacity-building, Representation and Intracommunity Conflict," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(1), pages 57-70, January.
    2. Carol H. Weiss, 1997. "How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway?," Evaluation Review, , vol. 21(4), pages 501-524, August.
    3. Myrna Mandell & Robyn Keast, 2008. "Evaluating the effectiveness of interorganizational relations through networks," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 715-731.
    4. Yuval Ofek, 2016. "Matching Evaluation Approaches to Levels of Complexity," Evaluation Review, , vol. 40(1), pages 61-84, February.
    5. John Edwards, 1997. "Urban Policy: The Victory of Form over Substance?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 34(5-6), pages 825-843, May.
    6. Diana Epstein & Jacob Alex Klerman, 2012. "When is a Program Ready for Rigorous Impact Evaluation? The Role of a Falsifiable Logic Model," Evaluation Review, , vol. 36(5), pages 375-401, October.
    7. Richard Meegan & Alison Mitchell, 2001. "'It's Not Community Round Here, It's Neighbourhood' : Neighbourhood Change and Cohesion in Urban Regeneration Policies," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(12), pages 2167-2194, November.
    8. 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. Lake, G. & Urban, M. & Giblin, F. & French, G. & Farrell, T., 2022. "Making a difference in the real world. User-centred impact evaluation of an eight-country, community-based early childhood programme," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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. Jabeen, Sumera, 2016. "Do we really care about unintended outcomes? An analysis of evaluation theory and practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 144-154.
    2. Jabeen, Sumera, 2018. "Unintended outcomes evaluation approach: A plausible way to evaluate unintended outcomes of social development programmes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 262-274.
    3. Peterson, Christina & Skolits, Gary, 2019. "Evaluating unintended program outcomes through Ripple Effects Mapping (REM): Application of REM using grounded theory," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    4. David Valler & David Betteley, 2001. "The Politics of 'Integrated' Local Policy in England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(13), pages 2393-2413, December.
    5. von dem Knesebeck, Olaf & Joksimovic, Ljiljana & Badura, Bernhard & Siegrist, Johannes, 2002. "Evaluation of a community-level health policy intervention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 111-122, July.
    6. Rob Atkinson, 2000. "Combating Social Exclusion in Europe: The New Urban Policy Challenge," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(5-6), pages 1037-1055, May.
    7. Claire Edwards, 2001. "Inclusion in Regeneration: A Place for Disabled People?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(2), pages 267-286, February.
    8. Steven Henderson, 2012. "An Evaluation of the Layering and Legacy of Area-based Regeneration Initiatives in England: The Case of Wolverhampton," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(6), pages 1201-1227, May.
    9. Harris, Kevin & Adams, Andrew, 2016. "Power and discourse in the politics of evidence in sport for development," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 97-106.
    10. Hart, Diane & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2017. "A utilisation focussed and viable systems approach for evaluating technology supported learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 626-641.
    11. 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.
    12. LaVelle, John M. & Davies, Randall, 2021. "Seeking consensus: Defining foundational concepts for a graduate level introductory program evaluation course," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Melz, Heidi & Fromknecht, Anne E. & Masters, Loren D. & Richards, Tammy & Sun, Jing, 2023. "Incorporating multiple data sources to assess changes in organizational capacity in child welfare systems," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. ter Bogt, Henk & Tillema, Sandra, 2016. "Accounting for trust and control: Public sector partnerships in the arts," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 5-23.
    15. Raphael Calel & Alex Jeffery & Tim Laing & Sander van den Burg & Alexandru V Roman & Marta Bivand Erdal & Sander van der Linden & Raphael Calel & Jana Temelová & Justin Greaves & Emma Street, 2012. "Review: Progress for the Poor, Walled States, Waning Sovereignty, the International Handbook on Non-Market Environmental Valuation, Timber, Global Corruption Report: Climate Change, the Political Econ," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(4), pages 746-760, August.
    16. Wingate, Lori A. & Smith, Nick L. & Perk, Emma, 2018. "The project vita: A dynamic knowledge management tool," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 22-27.
    17. Metta, Matteo & Ciliberti, Stefano & Obi, Chinedu & Bartolini, Fabio & Klerkx, Laurens & Brunori, Gianluca, 2022. "An integrated socio-cyber-physical system framework to assess responsible digitalisation in agriculture: A first application with Living Labs in Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    18. Fred Coalter, 2017. "Sport and Social Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 141-149.
    19. Chris Jensen-Butler, 1999. "Cities in Competition: Equity Issues," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(5-6), pages 865-891, May.
    20. Arbour, Ghislain, 2020. "Teaching programme evaluation: A problem of knowledge," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(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:60:y:2017:i:c:p:46-55. 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.