Program Evaluation Standards for Utility Facilitate Stakeholder Internalization of Evaluative Thinking in the West Virginia Clinical Translational Science Institute.

Reagan Curtis, Abhik Roy, Nikki Lewis, Evana Nusrat Dooty, Taylor Mikalik
{"title":"Program Evaluation Standards for Utility Facilitate Stakeholder Internalization of Evaluative Thinking in the West Virginia Clinical Translational Science Institute.","authors":"Reagan Curtis, Abhik Roy, Nikki Lewis, Evana Nusrat Dooty, Taylor Mikalik","doi":"10.56645/jmde.v19i43.831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The program evaluation standards (PES) can be considered established criteria for high-quality evaluations. We emphasize PES Utility standards and evaluation capacity building as we strive for meaningful application of our work in the real world.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We focused our methodology on understanding how stakeholders discussed utility and how their perceptions related to our evaluation work aligned with the Utility domain of the program evaluation standards.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The West Virginia Clinical Translational Science Institute (WVCTSI), a statewide multi-institutional entity for which we have conducted tracking and evaluation since 2012.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Sustained collaborative engagement of evaluation stakeholders with the goal of increasing their utilization of evaluation products and evaluative thinking.</p><p><strong>Research design: </strong>Case study.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>We interviewed five key stakeholders. We used themes developed from coding of interview data to inform document analyses. We used interview and document analyses to develop additional themes and illustrative examples, as well as to develop and describe a five-level evaluation uptake scale.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We describe shifts in initiation, use, and internalization of evaluative thinking by non-evaluation personnel. These shifts prompted our development and application of an evaluation uptake scale to capture increased evaluation capacity among stakeholders over time. We discuss how focus on the PES Utility standards and evaluation capacity building facilitated these shifts, and their implications for maximizing utility of evaluation activity in large, complex programmatic evaluations.</p>","PeriodicalId":91909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","volume":" ","pages":"49-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10936652/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v19i43.831","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The program evaluation standards (PES) can be considered established criteria for high-quality evaluations. We emphasize PES Utility standards and evaluation capacity building as we strive for meaningful application of our work in the real world.

Purpose: We focused our methodology on understanding how stakeholders discussed utility and how their perceptions related to our evaluation work aligned with the Utility domain of the program evaluation standards.

Setting: The West Virginia Clinical Translational Science Institute (WVCTSI), a statewide multi-institutional entity for which we have conducted tracking and evaluation since 2012.

Intervention: Sustained collaborative engagement of evaluation stakeholders with the goal of increasing their utilization of evaluation products and evaluative thinking.

Research design: Case study.

Data collection and analysis: We interviewed five key stakeholders. We used themes developed from coding of interview data to inform document analyses. We used interview and document analyses to develop additional themes and illustrative examples, as well as to develop and describe a five-level evaluation uptake scale.

Findings: We describe shifts in initiation, use, and internalization of evaluative thinking by non-evaluation personnel. These shifts prompted our development and application of an evaluation uptake scale to capture increased evaluation capacity among stakeholders over time. We discuss how focus on the PES Utility standards and evaluation capacity building facilitated these shifts, and their implications for maximizing utility of evaluation activity in large, complex programmatic evaluations.

西弗吉尼亚临床转化科学研究所的效用项目评估标准促进利益相关者评估思维的内化
背景:项目评估标准(PES)可以被认为是高质量评估的既定标准。我们强调PES效用标准和评估能力建设,努力将我们的工作有意义地应用于现实世界。目的:我们的方法重点是了解利益相关者如何讨论效用,以及他们对我们的评估工作的看法如何与PES效用标准保持一致。环境:西弗吉尼亚州临床转化科学研究所(WVCTSI)是一个全国性的多机构实体,自2012年以来,我们对其进行跟踪和评估。干预:评估利益相关者的持续协作参与,目标是增加他们对评估产品和评估思维的利用。研究设计:案例研究。数据收集和分析:我们采访了五个关键利益相关者。主题源于PES Utility对访谈数据标准编码的分析,为文献分析提供信息。访谈和文献分析用于发展主题和说明性例子,以及发展和描述一个五级评估吸收量表。研究结果:我们描述了非评估人员在评估思维的发起、使用和内化方面的转变,这些转变促使了评估吸收量表的开发和应用,以捕捉利益相关者随着时间的推移而增加的评估能力。我们讨论了对PES效用和评价能力建设的关注如何促进了这种转变,以及它们对在大型复杂的方案评价中最大限度地利用评价活动的影响。关键词:项目评价标准、评价效用、评价能力建设。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信