Owen (2007) suggests that for macro-programs all stakeholders should be aware whether or not the program is working and whether or not there are any negative side effects resulting from the programs initiatives; “Impact evaluation rests partly on not-unreasonable assumption that citizens at large should know whether programs funded by government, or in which they have an interest, are making a difference. Stakeholders expect that programs, where possible, meet their intended goals and do not lead to negative side effects (p.252).” Owen continues with this thought in suggesting that Accountability and Impact Evaluation are related. As we learned how to monitor evaluation in the
previous session, that accountability is crucial to the success of a program and in understanding its strengths and weaknesses and potential areas for change. (Owen, 2007 p. 241)
Impact evaluation is concerned with how the program is working and why or why not. This is where the accountability aspect of the impact
evaluation can be further understood of its importance. If a program isn’t working for a specific reason, then there must be someone or something accountable for it. As we look deeper into impact evaluation it is important to understand that there are several key approaches within Impact Evaluation:
Objective based: determines whether or not the goals/objectives are being achieved;
Needs based: determines the ‘worth’ of a program as it relates to an identifiable need;
Goal free: an approach where an evaluator neglects the awareness of the programs goals in an effort to assess the programs effects without
bias;
Process-outcome studies: an examination of the program implementation process;
Realistic evaluation: an examination of the program viewed through a ‘realistic’ lens that assess through data inquiry and understands the cause and effect of the program without using generalizations, and;
Performance audit: a full circle examination of the performance of resources deployed for the program – everything from financial to systems to personnel.
previous session, that accountability is crucial to the success of a program and in understanding its strengths and weaknesses and potential areas for change. (Owen, 2007 p. 241)
Impact evaluation is concerned with how the program is working and why or why not. This is where the accountability aspect of the impact
evaluation can be further understood of its importance. If a program isn’t working for a specific reason, then there must be someone or something accountable for it. As we look deeper into impact evaluation it is important to understand that there are several key approaches within Impact Evaluation:
Objective based: determines whether or not the goals/objectives are being achieved;
Needs based: determines the ‘worth’ of a program as it relates to an identifiable need;
Goal free: an approach where an evaluator neglects the awareness of the programs goals in an effort to assess the programs effects without
bias;
Process-outcome studies: an examination of the program implementation process;
Realistic evaluation: an examination of the program viewed through a ‘realistic’ lens that assess through data inquiry and understands the cause and effect of the program without using generalizations, and;
Performance audit: a full circle examination of the performance of resources deployed for the program – everything from financial to systems to personnel.