Evaluating Collective Impact Initiatives: A Systematic Scoping Review

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
S. Panjwani, Taylor Graves-Boswell, W. Garney, Daenuka Muraleetharan, Mandy N. Spadine, Sara A Flores
{"title":"Evaluating Collective Impact Initiatives: A Systematic Scoping Review","authors":"S. Panjwani, Taylor Graves-Boswell, W. Garney, Daenuka Muraleetharan, Mandy N. Spadine, Sara A Flores","doi":"10.1177/10982140221130266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Collective impact (CI) is a structured approach that helps drive multi-sector collaborations to address social problems through systems changes. While the CI approach is gaining popularity, practitioners experience challenges in evaluating its implementation and intended outcomes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to understand evaluation methods specific to CI initiatives, identify challenges or limitations with these evaluations, and provide recommendations for the design of CI evaluations. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Process evaluations were the most frequently used evaluation design. Most studies collected cross-sectional data to evaluate their efforts. The complexity of CI was most frequently cited as the greatest evaluation challenge. Study recommendations primarily focused on improvements during the evaluation planning phase. Taking careful consideration in the planning of CI evaluations, developing context-specific data collection methods, and communicating results intentionally and effectively could prove useful to sufficiently capture and assess this systems-level approach to address social problems.","PeriodicalId":51449,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Evaluation","volume":"44 1","pages":"406 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140221130266","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collective impact (CI) is a structured approach that helps drive multi-sector collaborations to address social problems through systems changes. While the CI approach is gaining popularity, practitioners experience challenges in evaluating its implementation and intended outcomes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to understand evaluation methods specific to CI initiatives, identify challenges or limitations with these evaluations, and provide recommendations for the design of CI evaluations. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Process evaluations were the most frequently used evaluation design. Most studies collected cross-sectional data to evaluate their efforts. The complexity of CI was most frequently cited as the greatest evaluation challenge. Study recommendations primarily focused on improvements during the evaluation planning phase. Taking careful consideration in the planning of CI evaluations, developing context-specific data collection methods, and communicating results intentionally and effectively could prove useful to sufficiently capture and assess this systems-level approach to address social problems.
评估集体影响计划:系统的范围审查
集体影响(CI)是一种结构化的方法,有助于推动多部门合作,通过系统变革解决社会问题。虽然CI方法越来越受欢迎,但从业者在评估其实施和预期结果方面遇到了挑战。我们进行了系统的范围界定审查,以了解CI倡议的具体评估方法,确定这些评估的挑战或局限性,并为CI评估的设计提供建议。18项研究符合纳入标准。过程评价是最常用的评价设计。大多数研究都收集了横断面数据来评估他们的努力。CI的复杂性最常被认为是最大的评估挑战。研究建议主要侧重于评价规划阶段的改进。在CI评估的规划中仔细考虑,制定针对具体情况的数据收集方法,并有意有效地传达结果,可以证明有助于充分捕捉和评估这种系统层面的方法来解决社会问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Evaluation
American Journal of Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Evaluation (AJE) publishes original papers about the methods, theory, practice, and findings of evaluation. The general goal of AJE is to present the best work in and about evaluation, in order to improve the knowledge base and practice of its readers. Because the field of evaluation is diverse, with different intellectual traditions, approaches to practice, and domains of application, the papers published in AJE will reflect this diversity. Nevertheless, preference is given to papers that are likely to be of interest to a wide range of evaluators and that are written to be accessible to most readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信