IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v4y1984i1p49-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Field Network Research In Policy Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Paul R. Dommol
  • John Stuart Hall

Abstract

The field‐network evaluation studies (FNES) approach to policy evaluation research seeks to overcome deficiencies of small‐sample case study method and of the large‐sample survey research approach. Methodologically, FNES uses many of the familiar techniques of both these approaches interviews, data collection and analysis, limited sampling, field observation, and document analysis. The crucial difference is sample size. The FNES approach using a middle‐range sample of 50 to 60 research sites has the advantages of the case study method in being able to provide an in depth account of a program and how it operates, and is sufficiently flexible to permit a shift in the analytical framework as the research proceeds thus overcoming the inflexibility of the instruments of survey research. Seven major studies employing the FNES approach have been carried out or are underway in the United States of America. The principal components of the methodology are a network of university‐based field associates and a central management group. The field associates collect the information and the data using a uniform analytical framework and reporting form. The central staff aggregates these analyses into a single report that cuts across the sample. This approach and the use of a middle‐range sample make it possible to draw generalizable conclusions based on the national experience, and also provide sufficient detail to differentiate policy impacts among the sample jurisdictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul R. Dommol & John Stuart Hall, 1984. "Field Network Research In Policy Evaluation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 4(1), pages 49-59, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:4:y:1984:i:1:p:49-59
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1984.tb00160.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1984.tb00160.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1984.tb00160.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:4:y:1984:i:1:p:49-59. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.