A mixed method study of propensity for participatory evaluation
One way to increase the use of evaluation results is practical participatory evaluation (PPE), which enables non-evaluator participants to join the evaluation process in a participatory mode. We examined the propensity for PPE of health professionals by focusing on four components: learning, working in groups, using judgment and using systematic methods. We interviewed the professionals at a Haitian health institution to determine their positioning on a scale of propensity (low, medium and high) for the four components. The professionals defined each component in relation to the energy puts into them, being more or less proactive. Facilitating elements for all three levels of propensity integration included past positive experiences, external pressure and a desire for better individual and organizational performance. Impeding factors included a lack of available resources perceived responsibilities and commitments toward private patients. The reported advantages included improved organizational performance and idea sharing, and the disadvantages included availability of, difficulty implementing solutions and altered human relationships.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Turnbull, B., 1999. "The mediating effect of participation efficacy on evaluation use," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 131-140, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:34:y:2011:i:3:p:217-227. 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: (Dana Niculescu)
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.