Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Uma Experiência de Desenvolvimento Metodológico para Avaliação de Programas: O Modelo Lógico do Programa Segundo Tempo

Contents:

Author Info

  • Helder Ferreira
  • Martha Cassiolato
  • Roberto Gonzalez
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Em 2005, a Comissão de Monitoramento e Avaliação, órgão colegiado de composição interministerial e coordenado pela Secretaria de Planejamento e Investimentos Estratégicos do Ministério do Planejamento Orçamento e Gestão (SPI/MP), demandou aos integrantes de sua Câmara Técnica o desenvolvimento de uma proposta metodológica para avaliação de programas do Plano Plurianual (PPA). Na ocasião, foi enfatizada a necessidade de uma proposta de avaliação menos complexa e de menor custo, a qual deveria preceder a contratação de avaliações de maior profundidade. A metodologia, a ser aplicada a qualquer tipo de programa governamental, deveria estar focada no aperfeiçoamento de aspectos relacionados ao desenho e ao gerenciamento de programas, mas com potencial para, ao mesmo tempo, sistematizar a demanda por avaliações de resultados das ações do governo. Para o desenvolvimento da proposta, tomou-se como fundamento a metodologia de Exame de Avaliabilidade, de Joseph S. Wholey. Esta foi inicialmente concebida enquanto uma pré-avaliação para se verificar se um programa está desenhado para ser gerenciado por resultados, e identificar quais as mudanças necessárias para que isto ocorra. Uma etapa crucial da metodologia é a construção do modelo lógico de resultados, que cumpre o papel de explicitar a teoria do programa e aferir sua qualidade, verificando se está bem desenhado e se apresenta um plano plausível de alcance de resultados. Na experiência de desenvolvimento metodológico aqui relatada foram acrescentados novos aportes à teoria do modelo lógico, tal como concebida por Wholey e outros autores norte-americanos. Esta proposta de construção de modelo lógico desenvolvida pelo Ipea foi incorporada pelo MP, inicialmente em caráter experimental, em 2007, em 20 programas finalísticos do PPA. Em 2008, sua aplicação está em curso em mais 50 programas. The Monitoring and Evaluation Committee demanded to the participants of the Technical Chamber the development of a methodological proposal for the program evaluation of the Plurianual Plan (PPA). At that occasion, it was stressed the necessity of an evaluation proposal less complex and with low cost. Such evaluation methodology, to be applied to every kind of governmental program, must focus the improvement of aspects related to program design and management, but with potential to systematize the demand for results evaluation of government actions. For the methodological development, the main foundation adopted was the methodology of Evaluability Assessment of Joseph S. Wholey, which was initially formulated as a kind of pre-evaluation to verify if a program is designed to be managed for results and to identify what changes are needed to achieve results. A crucial stage of this methodology is the elaboration of logic model, which has the function of making explicit the program theory and to assess its quality, verifying if the program is well designed and presents a plausible plan of results achievement. The actual experience of methodological development, presented in this text, incorporated new aspects to the basic theory of logic model. A result to be reported is the adoption, by the Ministry of Planning, of the Ipea proposal for building logic model. This instrument was experimentally applied, in 2007, to 20 programs and is currently being applied to 50 federal programs.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/td_1369.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA in its series Discussion Papers with number 1369.

    as in new window
    Length: 47 pages
    Date of creation: Jan 2009
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1369

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: SBS - Quadra 01 - Bloco J - Ed. BNDES, Brasília, DF - 70076-90
    Phone: +55(061)315-5000
    Fax: +55(61)321-1597
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.ipea.gov.br
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1369. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fabio Schiavinatto).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.