IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v80y2020ics0149718917301350.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The theory of change of the evaluation support program: Enhancing the role of community organizations in providing an ecology of care for neurological disorders

Author

Listed:
  • Arasanz, Carla
  • Nylen, Kirk

Abstract

This paper discusses the Ontario Brain Institute’s theory of change for the Evaluation Support Program, a program designed to enhance the role of community organizations in providing care and services for people living with a brain disorder. This is done by helping community organizations build evaluation capacity and foster the use of evidence to inform their activities and services. Helping organizations to build capacities to track the ‘key ingredients’ of their successes will help ensure that successes are replicated and services can be improved to maximize the benefit that people receive from them. This paper describes the hypothesized outcomes and early impacts of the Evaluation Support Program, as well as how the program will contribute to the field of evaluation capacity building.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:80:y:2020:i:c:s0149718917301350
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.05.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718917301350
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.05.012?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. Archibald, Thomas & Sharrock, Guy & Buckley, Jane & Cook, Natalie, 2016. "Assumptions, conjectures, and other miracles: The application of evaluative thinking to theory of change models in community development," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 119-127.
    2. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2011. "Ten steps to making evaluation matter," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-146, May.
    3. Morgan, Debra G. & Semchuk, Karen M. & Stewart, Norma J. & D'Arcy, Carl, 2002. "Rural families caring for a relative with dementia: barriers to use of formal services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 1129-1142, October.
    4. 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. Dale, Simon & Frost, Matthew & Ison, Stephen, 2023. "The theory of change and realistic evaluation applied to the evaluation of a transport intervention: The case of the Nottingham Workplace Parking Levy," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 98(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. Nylen, Kirk & Sridharan, Sanjeev, 2020. "Experiments in evaluation capacity building: Enhancing brain disorders research impact in Ontario," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Jones, Bobby & Caudill, Barry & Nakaima, April, 2016. "Steps towards incorporating heterogeneities into program theory: A case study of a data-driven approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 88-97.
    3. Clark, Alexander M., 2013. "What are the components of complex interventions in healthcare? Theorizing approaches to parts, powers and the whole intervention," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 185-193.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. 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).
    9. Alexandra J. Werntz & Chad S. Dodson & Alexander J. Schiller & Catherine D. Middlebrooks & Ellen Phipps, 2015. "Mental Health in Rural Caregivers of Persons With Dementia," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, December.
    10. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2023. "Learning from experiences of evaluators implementing theory-driven evaluations in diverse settings: Building on the contributions of John Mayne," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    11. Arbour, Ghislain, 2020. "Teaching programme evaluation: A problem of knowledge," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    12. Jan Činčera & Grzegorz Mikusiński & Bohuslav Binka & Luis Calafate & Cristina Calheiros & Alexandra Cardoso & Marcus Hedblom & Michael Jones & Alex Koutsouris & Clara Vasconcelos & Katarzyna Iwińska, 2019. "Managing Diversity: The Challenges of Inter-University Cooperation in Sustainability Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    13. 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.
    14. Picciotto, Robert, 2019. "Is evaluation obsolete in a post-truth world?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 88-96.
    15. 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).
    16. McConnell, Jesse, 2019. "Adoption for adaptation: A theory-based approach for monitoring a complex policy initiative," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 214-223.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. Bean, Corliss N. & Kendellen, Kelsey & Halsall, Tanya & Forneris, Tanya, 2015. "Putting program evaluation into practice: Enhancing the Girls Just Wanna Have Fun program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 31-40.

    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:80:y:2020:i:c:s0149718917301350. 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.