This article provides a discussion on the question of validity in qualitative evaluation. Although validity in qualitative inquiry has been widely reflected upon in the methodological literature (and is still often subject of debate), the link with evaluation research is underexplored. Elaborating on epistemological and theoretical conceptualizations by Guba and Lincoln and Creswell and Miller, the article explores aspects of validity of qualitative research with the explicit objective of connecting them with aspects of evaluation in social policy. It argues that different purposes of qualitative evaluations can be linked with different scientific paradigms and perspectives, thus transcending unproductive paradigmatic divisions as well as providing a flexible yet rigorous validity framework for researchers and reviewers of qualitative evaluations.

translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.Cover illustration: Détail de la Tour Eiffel © nemesis2207/Fotolia.co.uk

This article reports on the effects of the Social Support Act (Wmo) in the Netherlands, implemented in 2007. The Dutch Act resembles the current European political interpretation of citizenship: stressing self-responsibility in one's personal life, fighting against elements of the welfare state that are believed to be invasive and implying a shared responsibility of government and civil society for the care of socially vulnerable groups. Data were collected on the basis of two surveys evaluating the effects of the Wmo for voluntary organisations and professional nonprofit institutions in social care and welfare (2007: N = 383 and 2009-10: N = 389). In addition, in-depth interviews with stakeholders and qualitative case studies were carried out. The study yields several paradoxical policy outcomes. Contrary to the objectives of the Social Support Act, a 'revitalisation' of the Dutch civil society -in terms of a greater contribution to social goals and policies -remains problematic, whilst professional entities thrive under the new governmentaĺ elan. Other paradoxical outcomes stem from a too-dogmatic approach to the social participation of people with severe mental disabilities. Instigating the socialisation of these groups through mandatory measures can in practice increase their isolation. To reduce unintended effects, the Social Support Act should take into account the divergent capacities of vulnerable groups and prioritise the psychological safety of clients over political and administrative policy objectives. Note1 The names Marga Lammers and Peter Dijkstra are fictitious for reasons of privacy.

Safety perceptions of residents are often analysed through surveys and compared with factual crime developments. Using the Dutch city of Rotterdam as an urban context of improved crime levels, this article provides a critique on standardised surveys in the research of safety perceptions and its presupposed connection to factual crime. Contrasting survey results from the Rotterdam Safety Index with qualitative data from 64 in-depth interviews in four districts, the qualitative narrative contradicts findings from the survey and implies more nuanced and diversified policy responses to safety issues. Because of the tendency of surveys to connect safety perceptions to factual crime, their unsuitability to catch subtle perceptions and their inability to expose new viewpoints, we argue for de-quantification: a lesser dependency on-but not a repeal of-survey data in this area, supplemented by a periodic qualitative approach in the research of crime and safety information (qualitative monitoring).

No abstract