This paper examines the use of program logic against the background of the politicised environment of evaluations. Its central argument is that the development of a program logic for the purpose of focusing an evaluation can be a highly politicised process, given that it requires sign-off by the ‘authorising environment’. We commence with a brief discussion of how politics surface within organisations because evaluation planning is typically conducted within these settings. A model of change management is then introduced to highlight how political forces both hostile to and supportive of the evaluation process can surface when evaluations are being planned. We next consider two scenarios, drawn from the evaluation of a program to improve the competence and confidence of professionals working with people at risk of self-harm and suicide. These scenarios are used to highlight a number of important points about the politics of focusing an evaluation. The paper concludes by identifying some of the dilemmas that evaluation practitioners may need to work through in focusing an evaluation in a highly politicised environment, as well as how these might be addressed using program logic.
Organising performance information into a series of levels clarified what the information collected could prove and what it could not prove. This layout also helped to demonstrate links between activities and suicide prevention and, despite an impact evaluation being unobtainable, a level of confidence in the program's worth was gained. However, our paper maintains that this does not replace the value and importance of thorough impact evaluation, given that very little is known about what works in the suicide prevention area.
Aged care and disability service organizations are critical infrastructure. However, in 2020, restrictions were introduced to reduce the infection risk of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and these organizations needed to quickly devise COVID-safe ways of working to continue to meet the needs of their clients. To investigate how these organizations adapted their service delivery and which innovations they felt were worthwhile for sustaining beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, interviews were undertaken with representatives from 26 aged care and disability service organizations across three states in Australia (Western Australia, New South Wales, and Victoria). Findings revealed that organizations adapted their practices across three key innovation areas: (1) developing new approaches or expanding existing services, particularly around food provision, social connection, information dissemination, and technology support; (2) modifying the mode of service delivery, through safe in-person contact or offering alternative online services; and (3) reducing bureaucracy and introducing remote working. A common theme across all service innovations was the strong focus on providing clients and staff with choice and control. Moving forward, many organizations wanted to integrate and maintain these innovations, as they were associated with additional benefits such as increased client health and safety, service flexibility, and sufficient human resources to serve clients. However, continued maintenance of some initiatives require additional resourcing. The continuation of COVID-19 pandemic adaptations and, indeed, ongoing innovation, would therefore be facilitated by greater flexibility of funding to allow organizations and their clients to determine the service types and modes that best meet their needs. Further, these innovations have implications for sector-wide best practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.