Alignment Table for Plan
Components
Evaluation Overview
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 |
Evaluation Overview
|
Describes the purposes and questions that will drive
the evaluation, as well as the credentials of the
evaluator and the anticipated involvement of
stakeholders in the evaluation.
|
|
|
|
Describes the
goals and
objectives of the evaluation.
These should be focused around identifying the
project's strengths and weaknesses as well as
accomplishments and challenges, either in terms of how
well its implementation will be carried out
(formative
evaluation) and/or how successful it will be in
achieving intended outcomes
(summative
evaluation).
This section of the plan may also propose additional
"goal-free" purposes that involve gathering
and inductively analyzing data in order to understand
dimensions of the project that were not anticipated by
the project when its goals were set.
|
The purposes of the evaluation should be stated in
terms of
goals and intended uses of
results by
stakeholders.
The evaluation should focus on whether or not
promised project components are delivered and compare
project outcomes against the assessed needs of the
targeted
participants or other beneficiaries. They
should also be directed at finding unanticipated
outcomes, both positive and negative.
|
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.
|
|
States the questions that will be answered through
data collection, analysis, and
interpretation.
Evaluation questions are developed from the evaluation
goals and
objectives and state specific information
needs. They focus on aspects and outcomes of the
project that are important to the
stakeholders.
|
Evaluation questions that address context,
implementation, and outcome variables provide the
perspective not only for the eventual
interpreting
of
results, but also for understanding the conditions
under which the results are obtained.
The questions should be justified against the
following criteria:
- To which
stakeholders will answers to the
questions be useful, and how?
- How will answers to the questions provide new
information?
The plan can also state questions that are worth
answering but will not be addressed in the evaluation
due to constraints (e.g., limited time or resources,
insufficiency of available data-gathering
techniques).
|
|
|
Specifies the evaluator's credentials.
|
The professional qualifications of the evaluator
should be specified in order to build trust in the
evaluation as it unfolds.
|
U2 Evaluator Credibility
Persons conducting the evaluation should be both
trustworthy and competent to perform the evaluation, so
that the evaluation findings achieve maximum credibility
and acceptance.
|
|
Describes what interests the various
stakeholders
will have in the evaluation, and what roles they will
play in it.
|
The plan should describe how the positions and
perspectives of the
stakeholders will be taken into
account throughout the evaluation, from planning to
data collection, analysis, and
interpretation.
Stakeholder involvement in the evaluation can be
beneficial because stakeholders can help the evaluator
better understand project
goals and
objectives, shape
evaluation questions, recommend data sources, and
review findings. As a consequence of being involved,
stakeholders are more likely to find the
results
credible, useful, and relevant, and less likely to
curtail evaluation operations or hinder accurate and
appropriate uses of the results.
|
F2 Political Viability
The evaluation should be planned and conducted with
anticipation of the different positions of various
interest groups, so that their cooperation may be
obtained, and so that possible attempts by any of
these groups to curtail evaluation operations or to
bias or misapply the
results can be averted or
counteracted.
|
|
|