Before addressing how each of the evaluation phases can be implemented, some thought needs to be given to who should conduct the evaluation.
There are four options regarding how an evaluation should be undertaken:
- Internal (i.e., carried out by those who are also implementing the intervention)
- Internally managed, with input from external researchers or organizations brought in specifically for this purpose
- Externally led and internally supported
- Independent external evaluation
Each of the four approaches has different implications with regard to costs and time required to carry them out, as summarized in TABLE 2.
TABLE 2. Evaluation Type: Resource Implications
|
Credibility
|
Type of evaluation
|
Cost
|
Time *
|
Considerations
|
|
+
++++
|
Internal evaluation
|
$
|
++++
|
· Good practice in evaluation.
· Internal data collection and reporting.
· Generates useful lessons and insights.
|
|
Internally managed, with external input
|
$$
|
+++
|
· Better practice in evaluation.
· When done right, will more likely be positively viewed in an external audit.
· Results can be shared with wide audience or group of stakeholders, especially when rigor has been validated.
|
|
Externally led, internally supported
|
$$$
|
++
|
· Generally considered best practice in evaluations.
· Best for reporting to widest audience or stakeholders.
· Adds credibility and objective assessment.
· Will more likely be positively viewed in an external audit.
|
|
Independent external evaluation
|
$$$$
|
+
|
Note: * “Time” means the time investment directly required of those implementing the program.
All four options have merit, and each has its own strengths and drawbacks. However, for some programs that deserve the expense investment, a case can be made that the most compelling and credible evaluations are those that are externally conducted.
NEXT – Section 3.2: Planning an Evaluation
PREVIOUS SECTION – Section 3: Undertaking Evaluations