IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v24y2000i4p407-431.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theory-Based Evaluation in Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Johanna D. Birckmayer

    (Poudre Health Services District)

  • Carol Hirschon Weiss

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

Theory-based evaluation (TBE) explores the how and why of program success or failure. Advocates of TBE claim that it produces information unavailable in traditional process and outcome studies. This article examines six published papers of TBEs. It finds that the authors of the papers do not always make explicit the relation of their data to the theory of the program. Nevertheless, it was evident in one or more cases that TBE identified unnecessary program components, located intermediary changes, raised new questions, contributed to a paradigm shift, highlighted the difficulties of taking successful pilot programs to scale, and provided clarity and focus for the evaluation. Interestingly, in none of the studies was the original theory completely right. Lessons for the future of TBE are drawn.

Suggested Citation

  • Johanna D. Birckmayer & Carol Hirschon Weiss, 2000. "Theory-Based Evaluation in Practice," Evaluation Review, , vol. 24(4), pages 407-431, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:24:y:2000:i:4:p:407-431
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0002400404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X0002400404
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X0002400404?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Huey-Tsyh & Rossi, Peter H., 1987. "The theory-driven approach to validity," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 95-103, January.
    2. Finney, John W. & Moos, Rudolf H., 1989. "Theory and method in treatment evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 307-316, January.
    3. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ellen Eliason Kisker & Diane Paulsell & John M. Love & Helen Raikes, "undated". "Pathways to Quality and Full Implementation in Early Head Start Programs," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 736a46ebaf784096a693b652a, Mathematica Policy Research.

    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. Taut, Sandy & Santelices, Verónica & Araya, Carolina & Manzi, Jorge, 2010. "Theory underlying a national teacher evaluation program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 477-486, November.
    2. Tim Benijts, 2014. "A Business Sustainability Model for Government Corporations. A Belgian Case Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 204-216, March.
    3. Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
    4. Ebenso, Bassey & Manzano, Ana & Uzochukwu, Benjamin & Etiaba, Enyi & Huss, Reinhard & Ensor, Tim & Newell, James & Onwujekwe, Obinna & Ezumah, Nkoli & Hicks, Joe & Mirzoev, Tolib, 2019. "Dealing with context in logic model development: Reflections from a realist evaluation of a community health worker programme in Nigeria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 97-110.
    5. Torvatn, Hans, 1999. "Using program theory models in evaluation of industrial modernization programs: three case studies," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 73-82.
    6. Wasserman, Deborah L., 2010. "Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 67-80, May.
    7. Voeten, J.J., 2012. "Understanding responsible innovation in small producers’ clusters in Northern Vietnam : A grounded theory approach to globalization and poverty alleviation," Other publications TiSEM e01da02b-ef2b-47c9-8d06-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Peyton, David J. & Scicchitano, Michael, 2017. "Devil is in the details: Using logic models to investigate program process," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 156-162.
    9. Matt Andrews, 2022. "This is How to Think About and Achieve Public Policy Success," CID Working Papers 413, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    10. Wifo, 2021. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 10/2021," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 94(10), October.
    11. Benson, Paul R. & Fisher, Gene A. & Diana, Augusto & Simon, Lorna & Gamache, Gail & Tessler, Richard C. & McDermeit, Melissa, 1996. "A state network of family support services: The massachusetts family support demonstration project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 27-39, February.
    12. Kent, Douglas R. & Donaldson, Stewart I. & Wyrick, Phelan A. & Smith, Peggy J., 2000. "Evaluating criminal justice programs designed to reduce crime by targeting repeat gang offenders," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 115-124, February.
    13. Sobelson, Robyn K. & Young, Andrea C., 2013. "Evaluation of a federally funded workforce development program: The Centers for Public Health Preparedness," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 50-57.
    14. 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.
    15. O'Keefe, Christine M. & Head, Richard J., 2011. "Application of logic models in a large scientific research program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 174-184, August.
    16. Vinícius P. Rodrigues & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Jakob W. Andersen & Tim C. McAloone, 2018. "Evaluating the Potential Business Benefits of Ecodesign Implementation: A Logic Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, June.
    17. Chanel Bjanca V. Balinbin & Krystina Trizia R. Balatbat & Alyssa Nicolette B. Balayan & Maria Isabel C. Balcueva & Mary Grace B. Balicat & Thea Arabelle S. Balidoy & John Rey B. Macindo & Gian Carlo S, 2020. "Occupational determinants of compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue among Filipino registered nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5-6), pages 955-963, March.
    18. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    19. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler, 2018. "Innovationseffizienz. Österreich im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61111, April.
    20. Fangyuan Chang & Andrea Eriksson & Britt Östlund, 2020. "Discrepancies between Expected and Actual Implementation: The Process Evaluation of PERS Integration in Nursing Homes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-18, June.

    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:sae:evarev:v:24:y:2000:i:4:p:407-431. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.