IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v94y2022ics0149718922000775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Representing the values of program participants: Endogenous evaluative criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Teasdale, Rebecca M.

Abstract

Evaluative conclusions are grounded in implicit and explicit criteria that describe a successful or high-quality intervention. Most often, evaluative criteria are drawn from program objectives that reflect the values and priorities of program designers and funders. Yet, an exclusive focus on program goals risks overlooking the values of program participants, the extent to which their actual needs and priorities are addressed, and, in certain types of programs, the choices participants make and agency they exercise. This article presents concepts and methods to guide evaluators in drawing some of the criteria used in an evaluation from program participants. The article outlines a typology of evaluative criteria and seven methods for drawing outcomes-focused criteria from program participants. The article concludes with a discussion of implications and future directions for research and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Teasdale, Rebecca M., 2022. "Representing the values of program participants: Endogenous evaluative criteria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:94:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000775
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718922000775
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102123?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansen, Mark & Alkin, Marvin C. & Wallace, Tanner LeBaron, 2013. "Depicting the logic of three evaluation theories," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 34-43.
    2. James S. Dyer & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1979. "Group Preference Aggregation Rules Based on Strength of Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(9), pages 822-832, September.
    3. Harman, Elena & Azzam, Tarek, 2018. "Incorporating public values into evaluative criteria: Using crowdsourcing to identify criteria and standards," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 68-82.
    4. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2020. "Valuing and embracing complexity: How an understanding of complex interventions needs to shape our evaluation capacities building initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. Richard F. Catalano & M. Lisa Berglund & Jean A. M. Ryan & Heather S. Lonczak & J. David Hawkins, 2004. "Positive Youth Development in the United States: Research Findings on Evaluations of Positive Youth Development Programs," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 591(1), pages 98-124, January.
    6. Abraham, Traci H. & Deen, Tisha L. & Hamilton, Michelle & True, Gala & O’Neil, Marie T. & Blanchard, Jessica & Uddo, Madeline, 2020. "Analyzing free-text survey responses: An accessible strategy for developing patient-centered programs and program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. Dickinson, Pauline & Adams, Jeffery, 2017. "Values in evaluation – The use of rubrics," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 113-116.
    8. Schalock, Robert L. & Bonham, Gordon S. & Marchand, Cristine B., 2000. "Consumer based quality of life assessment: a path model of perceived satisfaction," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 77-87, February.
    9. Onken, Steven J., 2018. "Mental health consumer concept mapping of supportive community," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 36-45.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tingyin Wong & Daniel T. L. Shek, 2025. "Meaning-Focused Coping in University Students in Hong Kong During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(4), pages 1-30, April.
    2. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    3. Yanling Geng & Longtao He, 2022. "Gender Differences in Children’s Psychological Well-Being in Mainland China: Risk and Protective Factors," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(5), pages 2743-2763, October.
    4. Fujun Hou, 2015. "A Consensus Gap Indicator and Its Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 415-428, May.
    5. Kazak Jan K. & Simeunović Nataša & Hendricks Andreas, 2019. "Hidden Public Value Identification of Real Estate Management Decisions," Real Estate Management and Valuation, Sciendo, vol. 27(4), pages 96-104, December.
    6. Wu, Huang & Shen, Jianping & Jones, Jeffrey & Gao, Xingyuan & Zheng, Yunzheng & Krenn, Huilan Y., 2019. "Using logic model and visualization to conduct portfolio evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 69-75.
    7. Ruhr, Lindsay R. & Jordan Fowler, Lindsey, 2022. "Empowerment-focused positive youth development programming for underprivileged youth in the Southern U.S.: A qualitative evaluation," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    8. Gabriella D. Roude & Kimberly Wu & Lisa Richardson & Amber Tucker & Lolita Moss & Michelle Kondo & Christopher N. Morrison & Charles C. Branas & Jeanette Gustat & Katherine P. Theall, 2024. "The Impact of Vacant and Abandoned Property on Health and Well-Being: A Qualitative Inquiry," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 2125-2145, August.
    9. Mavrot, Céline & Potluka, Oto & Balzer, Lars & Eicher, Véronique & Haunberger, Sigrid & Heuer, Christine & Viallon, François-Xavier, 2025. "What evaluation criteria are used in policy evaluation research: A cross-field literature review," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    10. Marcus Pivato, 2015. "Social choice with approximate interpersonal comparison of welfare gains," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 181-216, September.
    11. Xinli Chi & Xiaofeng Liu & Qiaomin Huang & Xiumin Cui & Li Lin, 2020. "The Relationship between Positive Youth Development and Depressive Symptoms among Chinese Early Adolescents: A Three-Year Cross-Lagged Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Shaojie Qi & Fengrui Hua & Zheng Zhou & Daniel T. L. Shek, 2022. "Trends of Positive Youth Development Publications (1995–2020): A Scientometric Review," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 421-446, February.
    13. Yelin Fu & Yubing Sui & Hao Luo & Biao Han, 2020. "Application of Social Choice Theory to Modify the Value Measure of Health Systems," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 1005-1019, April.
    14. Tavares, L. Valadares, 2012. "An acyclic outranking model to support group decision making within organizations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 782-790.
    15. Hayashida, Tomohiro & Nishizaki, Ichiro & Ueda, Yoshifumi, 2010. "Multiattribute utility analysis for policy selection and financing for the preservation of the forest," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(3), pages 833-843, February.
    16. Contreras, I. & Marmol, A.M., 2007. "A lexicographical compromise method for multiple criteria group decision problems with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1530-1539, September.
    17. Cousins, J. Bradley, 2013. "When does a conceptual framework become a theory? Reflections from an accidental theorist," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 67-70.
    18. Baucells, Manel & Shapley, Lloyd S., 2008. "Multiperson utility," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 329-347, March.
    19. Dillman, Lisa M., 2013. "Comparing evaluation activities across multiple theories of practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 53-60.
    20. Melina A. Throuvala & Mark D. Griffiths & Mike Rennoldson & Daria J. Kuss, 2021. "Policy Recommendations for Preventing Problematic Internet Use in Schools: A Qualitative Study of Parental Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-23, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:epplan:v:94:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000775. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.