Corporate Grantmakers

Needs Assessments. These evaluations verify and map the extent of a problem. They answer questions about the number and characteristics of the individuals or institutions who would constitute the targets of a program to address the problem. Needs assessments can help design a new program or justify continuation of an existing program.

Monitoring. Monitoring activities produce regular, ongoing information that answers questions about whether a program or project is being implemented as planned, and identifies problems and facilitates their resolution in a timely way.

Formative Evaluations. These evaluations answer questions about how to improve and refine a developing or ongoing program. Formative evaluation usually is undertaken during the initial, or design, phase of a project. However, it also can be helpful for assessing the ongoing activities of an established program. formative evaluation may include process and impact studies. Typically, the findings from formative evaluations are provided as feedback to the programs evaluated.

Process Evaluations. Studies of this kind are directed toward understanding and documenting program implementation. They answer questions about the types and quantities of services delivered, the beneficiaries of those services, the resources used to deliver the services, the practical problems encountered, and the ways such problems were resolved. Information form process evaluations is useful for understanding how program impact and outcome were achieved and for program replication. Process evaluations are usually undertaken for projects that are innovative service delivery models, where the technology and the feasibility of implementation are not well known in advance.

Impact or Outcome Evaluations. These evaluations assess the effectiveness of a program in producing change. They focus on the difficult questions of what happened to program participants and how much of a difference the program made. Impact or outcome evaluations are undertaken when it is important to know how well a grantee's or foundation's objectives for a program were met, or when a program is an innovative model whose effectiveness has not yet been demonstrated.

Summative Evaluations. Summative evaluations answer questions about program quality and impact for the purposes of accountability and decision making. They are conducted at a project's or program's end and usually include a synthesis of process and impact or outcome evaluation components.

Expert peer review is associated with judgment-based information. the peer may be an individual or a committee. The review may consist of reading documents or site visits and interviews with project staff, participants or others, or both. The benefits of this approach are that it can be done quickly and at low cost. The hazard of the approach is that it depends totally on the knowledge, experience, and viewpoints of the experts chosen, and so runs the risk of being biased.

Data-based evaluation uses other methods. A descriptive analysis, for example, uses descriptive statistics to characterize a program, its participants, and attributes of the relevant social, political, or economic environment for the purpose of understanding how and why a program works. A case study makes extensive use of descriptive analytic methods.

A comparison-group design is called for when it is important to measure effects and to attribute those effects to a project or program. In such designs, a group of people or institutions who receive an innovative treatment or participate in a new program are compared with a similar group who do not receive the treatment or participate in the program. Differences in prespecified measures of impact or outcome between the two groups are attributed to the intervention.