stephanieho38_3244539_NURS606_Assignment_2_Paper_PosterPresentations_com_36x48_Template_V9_steph
1
RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2015 www.PosterPresentations.com The demand for professional evaluators is on the rise worldwide as governments are becoming more interested in cost saving throughout various social programs. A well-known evaluator, Michael Quinn Patton has dedicated his life to evaluation. More specifically utilization focused evaluation (U-FE); which was originally based on the central idea that this type of evaluation is to establish the intended use by the intended user (Patton, 2008). Evaluation has been shown to be a useful tool if used appropriately. It can greatly improve the needs of populations by improving the human condition. Introduction Standards for Evaluation Program evaluation seeks to uncover information about activities within social programs and analyse the program's effectiveness, revealing any improvements that need to be made to specific programs. Before the steps of U-FE can be broken down it is necessary to explain use by intended users. Patton (2010) states that "utilization- focused evaluation begins with the premise that evaluations should be judged by their utility and actual use. Therefore, evaluators should facilitate the evaluation process and design any evaluation with careful consideration of how everything that will be done, from beginning to end, will affect use" (p.12). Utilization- Focused Evaluation Checklist 1 Assess and build program and organizational readiness for utilization- focused evaluation. Step 2 Assess and enhance evaluator readiness and competence to undertake a utilization- focused evaluation. Step 3 Identify, organize, and engage primary intended users. Step 4 Conduct situation analysis with primary intended users Step 5 Identify primary intended uses by establishing the evaluation’s priority purposes. Step 6 Consider and build in process uses if appropriate. Step 7 Focus priority evaluation questions. Step 8 Check that fundamental areas for evaluation inquiry are being adequately addressed. Step 9 Determine what intervention model or theory of change is being evaluated. Step 10 Negotiate appropriate methods to generate credible findings and support intended use by intended users. Step 11 Make sure intended users understand potential controversies about methods and their implications. Step 12 Simulate use of findings. Step 13 Gather data with ongoing attention to use. Step 14 Organize and present the data for use by primary intended users. Step 15 Prepare an evaluation report to facilitate use and disseminate significant findings to expand influence. Step 16 Follow up with primary intended users to facilitate and enhance use. Step 17 Metaevaluation of use: Be accountable, learn, and improve (The Evaluation Centre, 2013) Components of Utilization-Focused Evaluation Utilization- Focused Evaluation Steps Critics Weiss (1988) has been quoted as saying "Mike Patton never mentions the world of politics; it is assumed everyone acts rationally. They don't seem concerned about drains on budgets, findings, qualified staff, extra work, disturbing ongoing relationships with other agencies, possible negative feedback from community groups of the press, getting the grant renewed, satisfying the curmudgeons on the board , or any of the concerns that exercise the program people I have dealt with" (pp.18-19). What Patton seems to describe is a mostly cooperative environment with a more cohesive community with shared values and common goals (Smith and Chircop, 1989). Patton begins all evaluations by seeking to understand the audience, stakeholders, and the primary intended users. This would encompass many of the initial concerns a stakeholder or program decision makers may have and could be addressed early on in the needs assessment. Karen Kirkhart (2000) wants to abandon the terms use and utilization in order to develop an integrated theory of evaluations consequences using the concept of evaluation influence. She defines influence as the ability of persons or things to produce effects on others by subtle or indirect means. She posits three dimensions, source of influence, intention, and time (Kirkhart, 2000). Patton (2008) believes that evaluations are utilized by means of a dynamic process that occurs over time as well, but remains sceptical about Kirharts hesitancy to capture multidirectional effects. Although the use of some evaluation language can appear pretentious and evaluators such as Kirkhart have attempted to remodel UFE to appear more effective for decision makers, it has been found that U-FE continues to be the centre piece of evaluation philosophy (Patton, 2008). Conclusion U-FE which focuses on intended use by intended users is an imperative model to follow, as it will ensure the programs utility, cost-effectiveness, and diversity. In simplified terms the steps involved with U-FE seek to discover what the program has intended for its target population or its goals. So what was the programs outcome and were the desired results achieved and what can we do now for future action and recommendations. References Kirkhart, K. (2000). Reconceptualising evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. New Directions for Evaluation, Vol. 88: 5-23. Patton, M.Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. The Evaluation Center. (2013). Michael Quinn Patton: utilization-focused evaluation (u-fe) checklist. Retrieved from: https://www.wmich.edu/sites/default/files/attachme nts/u350/2014/UFE_checklist_2013.pdf. Smith, N., Chircop, S. (1989). The Weiss-Patton debate: illumination of the fundamental concerns. American Journal of Evaluation,10,5-13. doi: 10.1177/109821408901000102 Weiss, C. (1988). Evaluation for decisions: is anybody there Does anybody care. Evaluation Practice, 9(3). 15-28. Wingate, L. (2009). The program evaluation standards applied for metaevaluation purposes: investigating interrater reliability and implications for use. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=1732&context=dissertations . Michael Quinn Patton's U-FE is searching to uncover three simple questions: What? So what? Now what? (Patton, 2008). Before the answer to these questions can be uncovered and an evaluation can begin the standards for evaluation must be considered. The first is utility, which ensures that an evaluation will provide useful information requirements of intended users (Wingate, 2009). Feasibility determines the evaluations need to be realistic, sensible, diplomatic, and frugal (Wingate, 2009). Propriety guides the evaluation towards legal, ethical, and appropriate regard to those in the study (Wingate, 2009). Lastly is accuracy standards, which ensure that the program is properly conveying the information that determines a programs value (Wingate, 2009). Faculty of Health Disciplines- Athabasca University, Alberta Presented by: Stephanie Howard Michael Quinn Patton- Utilization-Focused Evaluation
-
Upload
stephanie-howard -
Category
Documents
-
view
18 -
download
0
Transcript of stephanieho38_3244539_NURS606_Assignment_2_Paper_PosterPresentations_com_36x48_Template_V9_steph
RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2015
www.PosterPresentations.com
The demand for professional evaluators is on the rise worldwide as governments are becoming more interested in cost saving throughout various social programs. A well-known evaluator, Michael Quinn Patton has dedicated his life to evaluation. More specifically utilization focused evaluation (U-FE); which was originally based on the central idea that this type of evaluation is to establish the intended use by the intended user (Patton, 2008). Evaluation has been shown to be a useful tool if used appropriately. It can greatly improve the needs of populations by improving the human condition.
Introduction
Standards for Evaluation
Program evaluation seeks to uncover information about activities within social programs and analyse the program's effectiveness, revealing any improvements that need to be made to specific programs. Before the steps of U-FE can be broken down it is necessary to explain use by intended users. Patton (2010) states that "utilization- focused evaluation begins with the premise that evaluations should be judged by their utility and actual use. Therefore, evaluators should facilitate the evaluation process and design any evaluation with careful consideration of how everything that will be done, from beginning to end, will affect use" (p.12). Utilization- Focused Evaluation Checklist 1 Assess and build program and organizational readiness for utilization-focused evaluation. Step 2 Assess and enhance evaluator readiness and competence to undertake a utilization- focused evaluation. Step 3 Identify, organize, and engage primary intended users. Step 4 Conduct situation analysis with primary intended users Step 5 Identify primary intended uses by establishing the evaluation’s priority purposes. Step 6 Consider and build in process uses if appropriate. Step 7 Focus priority evaluation questions. Step 8 Check that fundamental areas for evaluation inquiry are being adequately addressed. Step 9 Determine what intervention model or theory of change is being evaluated. Step 10 Negotiate appropriate methods to generate credible findings and support intended use by intended users. Step 11 Make sure intended users understand potential controversies about methods and their implications. Step 12 Simulate use of findings. Step 13 Gather data with ongoing attention to use. Step 14 Organize and present the data for use by primary intended users. Step 15 Prepare an evaluation report to facilitate use and disseminate significant findings to expand influence. Step 16 Follow up with primary intended users to facilitate and enhance use. Step 17 Metaevaluation of use: Be accountable, learn, and improve (The Evaluation Centre, 2013)
Components of Utilization-Focused Evaluation Utilization- Focused Evaluation Steps Critics
Weiss (1988) has been quoted as saying "Mike Patton never mentions the world of politics; it is assumed everyone acts rationally. They don't seem concerned about drains on budgets, findings, qualified staff, extra work, disturbing ongoing relationships with other agencies, possible negative feedback from community groups of the press, getting the grant renewed, satisfying the curmudgeons on the board , or any of the concerns that exercise the program people I have dealt with" (pp.18-19). What Patton seems to describe is a mostly cooperative environment with a more cohesive community with shared values and common goals (Smith and Chircop, 1989). Patton begins all evaluations by seeking to understand the audience, stakeholders, and the primary intended users. This would encompass many of the initial concerns a stakeholder or program decision makers may have and could be addressed early on in the needs assessment.
Karen Kirkhart (2000) wants to abandon the terms use and utilization in order to develop an integrated theory of evaluations consequences using the concept of evaluation influence. She defines influence as the ability of persons or things to produce effects on others by subtle or indirect means. She posits three dimensions, source of influence, intention, and time (Kirkhart, 2000). Patton (2008) believes that evaluations are utilized by means of a dynamic process that occurs over time as well, but remains sceptical about Kirharts hesitancy to capture multidirectional effects. Although the use of some evaluation language can appear pretentious and evaluators such as Kirkhart have attempted to remodel UFE to appear more effective for decision makers, it has been found that U-FE continues to be the centre piece of evaluation philosophy (Patton, 2008).
ConclusionU-FE which focuses on intended use by intended users is an imperative model to follow, as it will ensure the programs utility, cost-effectiveness, and diversity. In simplified terms the steps involved with U-FE seek to discover what the program has intended for its target population or its goals. So what was the programs outcome and were the desired results achieved and what can we do now for future action and recommendations.
ReferencesKirkhart, K. (2000). Reconceptualising evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. New Directions for Evaluation, Vol. 88: 5-23.Patton, M.Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.The Evaluation Center. (2013). Michael Quinn Patton: utilization-focused evaluation (u-fe) checklist. Retrieved from: https://www.wmich.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/u350/2014/UFE_checklist_2013.pdf.Smith, N., Chircop, S. (1989). The Weiss-Patton debate: illumination of the fundamental concerns. American Journal of Evaluation,10,5-13. doi: 10.1177/109821408901000102Weiss, C. (1988). Evaluation for decisions: is anybody there Does anybody care. Evaluation Practice, 9(3). 15-28. Wingate, L. (2009). The program evaluation standards applied for metaevaluation purposes: investigating interrater reliability and implications for use. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1732&context=dissertations.
Michael Quinn Patton's U-FE is searching to uncover three simple questions: What? So what? Now what? (Patton, 2008). Before the answer to these questions can be uncovered and an evaluation can begin the standards for evaluation must be considered. The first is utility, which ensures that an evaluation will provide useful information requirements of intended users (Wingate, 2009). Feasibility determines the evaluations need to be realistic, sensible, diplomatic, and frugal (Wingate, 2009). Propriety guides the evaluation towards legal, ethical, and appropriate regard to those in the study (Wingate, 2009). Lastly is accuracy standards, which ensure that the program is properly conveying the information that determines a programs value (Wingate, 2009).
Faculty of Health Disciplines- Athabasca University, Alberta Presented by: Stephanie Howard
Michael Quinn Patton- Utilization-Focused Evaluation
