Alignment Table for Plan
Components
Design
The alignment table for sound project evaluation plans can
be viewed either as a whole, displaying all components, or
as four separate tables corresponding to plan
components: (1) Project Description, (2) Evaluation
Overview, (3) Design, and (4) Analysis Process. See the
alignment table overview for a
general description of what appears in the alignment
tables.
The glossary and
quality criteria entries for
plan components are also available on their own.
Component |
Glossary Entry |
Quality Criteria |
Related Program Evaluation Standards |
Design |
Describes what strategies and procedures will be used
to gather and analyze data; as well as which ones will
be used to periodically review the course of the
evaluation.
|
|
|
|
Specifies:
- formative or summative approaches that will be
taken
- types of data that will be needed (e.g.,
quantitative,
qualitative, pre-post,
longitudinal)
- sources of the data (e.g.,
participants,
documents)
|
The plan should describe the proposed methodological
approaches and how, within the constraints of time and
cost, they will yield data that help answer the
evaluation questions. The data gathered will need to
be aligned with the
goals that the project is intended
to achieve. The data can vary, however, in how
directly they indicate the attainment of project
goals. Most projects are more likely to show effects
on proximal outcomes than on distal outcomes that are
either logically or temporally remote. (For example, a
project has been designed to improve high school
students' motivation to learn science. A proximal
measure of the project's success would be student
self-reports of interest in science content gathered
immediately before and after the project. A distal
measure would be whether the students decide to study
science in college.)
Furthermore, the approaches should be grounded in
respected methodological frameworks and best-practice
literature. This increases the chance that project
features and context that are likely to make a
difference in project operations and outcomes will be
identified.
Methodological approaches that look narrowly at
project inputs and solely examine the
results of
quantitative outcome measures may not capture all
the noteworthy influences, impacts, and outcomes of a
complex project. Qualitative and mixed method
approaches present alternative ways of detecting
impacts, especially unanticipated ones. To corroborate
evaluation findings and to provide multiple
perspectives, it is highly desirable that evaluators
measure multiple outcomes and gather data from
multiple sources (triangulation).
Important constraints on the evaluation design
(e.g., lack of random assignment of respondents to
treatment and comparison groups, or lack of data on
long-term effects) should also be stated at this point
in the report.
|
U3 Information Scope and
Selection
Information collected should be broadly selected to
address pertinent questions about the project and be
responsive to the needs and interests of clients and
other specified
stakeholders.
F3 Cost Effectiveness
The evaluation should be efficient and produce
information of sufficient value, so that the resources
expended can be justified.
|
|
Describes the sources of information that will be
used in the evaluation, which may include:
- records and archival documents that contain
relevant information
- the entire population of
participants in the
project, if data were collected on all of them
- the sample or samples of participants or other
informants that will be observed or solicited for
information, in order to maximize the
generalizability of the findings to the population
from which the sample or samples are to be
drawn
|
The sources of information that will be used in the
evaluation should be described in enough detail to
build confidence that the information will be
sufficient to meet the evaluation's purposes.
The groups selected to provide information (e.g.,
administrators, teachers, students, parents) should be
identified and briefly described. If a sample is to be
drawn, the description should contain:
- the sample selection criteria (e.g., the lowest
achievers, the best instructors)
- the process by which the sample is to be selected
(e.g., random, purposive)
- the proposed sample size
- whether or not any comparison or control groups
will be included
- whether and how
participants will be assigned to
treatment and comparison groups
The extent to which the sample will be representative
of the entire population should be indicated.
Information about the sample will help reviewers
determine the extent to which the information provided
about the sample is of sufficient depth to help users
of the report judge its representativeness and
appropriateness given the scope, context, and
resources of the evaluation.
|
A3 Described Purposes and
Procedures
The purposes and procedures of the evaluation should
be monitored and described in enough detail, so that
they can be identified and assessed.
A4 Defensible Information Sources
The sources of information used in a program
evaluation should be described in enough detail, so
that the adequacy of the information can be
assessed.
|
|
Describes the design and content of the instruments
that will be used to collect and analyze data
(e.g., survey questionnaires, interview protocols,
observation forms,
learning assessments).
|
The plan should describe the nature of the various
instruments and how they will be used to gather the
needed information. Instruments should be used as
intended in order for the data produced to be
reliable and
valid.
|
A3 Described Purposes and
Procedures
The purposes and procedures of the evaluation should
be monitored and described in enough detail, so that
they can be identified and assessed.
|
|
Describes how the data and other information will be
gathered to meet the criteria of
validity and
reliability. Also describes the intended
frequency,
order, and duration of the various data collection
activities.
|
The plan should describe how and when data will be
obtained from the various sources and how the sources
will provide corroboration and multiple
perspectives.
A description of the data collection and its intent
will provide a context for the eventual judging and
interpreting of evaluation findings and
recommendations.
The timing of data collection is important because
the project's maturity is likely to have an impact on
outcomes.
Hence, this section should describe:
- how and when an appropriately broad range of data
will be collected
- what steps will be taken to get essential data
from the sample and other targeted sources (this
might include a human subjects review)
- what steps will be taken to ensure that the data
meet the criteria of
validity (e.g., piloting, field
testing,
stakeholder review)
- what steps will be taken to ensure that
reliability is achieved (e.g., systematic training
of data collectors and consistent data collection
and scoring procedures)
Different models of evaluation present different data
collection needs. For example, a
formative evaluation
requires that ongoing project activities be assessed
at points in time that enable project developers to
refine the project's components.
|
F1 Practical Procedures
The evaluation procedures should be practical, to keep
disruption to a minimum while needed information is
obtained.
A3 Described Purposes and
Procedures
The purposes and procedures of the evaluation should
be monitored and described in enough detail, so that
they can be identified and assessed.
A5
Valid Information
The information-gathering procedures should be chosen
or developed and then implemented so that they will
assure that the
interpretation arrived at is
valid for
the intended use.
A6
Reliable Information
The information-gathering procedures should be chosen
or developed and then implemented so that they will
assure that the information obtained is sufficiently
reliable for the intended use.
|
|
Describes procedures that will be undertaken to
review the quality of the evaluation being
conducted.
|
Evaluation purposes and procedures should be reviewed
periodically, particularly during longitudinal
evaluations, to determine whether the evaluation
design, instruments, and procedures are adequately
capturing the project's implementation, impacts, and
outcomes.
|
A12 Meta-Evaluation
The evaluation itself should be
formatively and
summatively evaluated against
standards, so
that its conduct is appropriately guided and, on
completion,
stakeholders can closely examine its
strengths and weaknesses.
|
|
|