Integrating costs and outcomes

Davis, Kenneth; Frank, Richard G.

doi:10.1002/ev.1609

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a method widely used by economists to evaluate the worth of policies and programs. CBA is not so widely used in program evaluation, however, and it has been argued that evaluators should include economic analysis more often (Davis & Frank, 1992;Julnes, 2012c;King, 2017;Yates, 2012). CBA is more widely taught and has a higher status in public policy than program evaluation, yet it is not routinely assessed against the PES.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How should Program Evaluation Standards inform the use of cost-benefit analysis in evaluation?

King¹

2023

J Multidiscip Eval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cost-benefit analysis (CBA), like any other evaluation method, should be used in ways that uphold program evaluation standards and should be subjected to metaevaluation. In contrast to the broad remit of program evaluation standards, guidelines for economic evaluation focus mainly on technical aspects of evaluation quality, aimed at ensuring precision, accuracy, and reliability. Can CBA be conducted in adherence both to program evaluation standards and to its own methodological principles, or are there areas where expectations conflict? Purpose: Assess the potential for CBA to be conducted in keeping with the Program Evaluation Standards (PES) of the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. Setting: Analysis applies to any setting in which CBA is being considered as an evaluation method. Intervention: N/A Research Design: Methodological principles underpinning CBA were systematically assessed against the PES, to determine the extent to which CBA can be conducted in a manner aligned with these standards. CBA was rated according to whether it can follow each standard in principle, not the extent to which economists follow a given standard in practice. Data Collection and Analysis: This assessment was undertaken from a theoretical perspective, through analysis of relevant literature. The ratings are evaluative; they represent the judgments of the author, made on the basis of explicit definitions. Findings: Some ethical principles espoused in the PES are also required in CBA. On the other hand, some of the PES are not explicit requirements in CBA, though they could be applied by evaluators or economists when conducting a CBA. However, some PES logically cannot be met by CBA if it is used as a stand-alone method. All PES can theoretically be met when an evaluation combines CBA with other methods. In order to use CBA in adherence to PES, evaluators and economists must take an explicit interest in the effects of their analysis on people’s lives. This has significant implications for the way CBA should be used, including the nature and extent of stakeholder involvement, the potential use of CBA in conjunction with other methods, and decisions about when not to use CBA. As with any evaluation method, deliberation is necessary over whether, when, and how to use CBA. Keywords: cost-benefit analysis, program evaluation standards, metaevaluation

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How should Program Evaluation Standards inform the use of cost-benefit analysis in evaluation?

King¹

2023

J Multidiscip Eval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a consequence, economic evaluation tends to be applied either in isolation from or in parallel to other methods of evaluation. This gap has been noted within the evaluation community, and it has been suggested that economic and other valuing methods should be better integrated (Davis & Frank, 1992; Julnes, 2012). An overarching framework is needed to guide the use of appropriate methods to determine the value of social investments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Economic Methods Evaluatively

King

2016

American Journal of Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As evaluators, we are often asked to determine whether policies and programs provide value for the resources invested. Addressing that question can be a quandary, and, in some cases, evaluators question whether cost-benefit analysis is fit for this purpose. With increased interest globally in social enterprise, impact investing, and social impact bonds, the search is on to find valid, credible, useful ways to determine the impact and value of social investments. This article argues that when addressing an evaluative question about an economic problem (the merit, worth, or significance of resource use), economic analysis can enhance evaluation but is usually insufficient to fully answer the evaluative question and that a stronger approach would involve explicit evaluative reasoning, supported by judicious use of economic and other methods. An overarching theoretical framework is proposed, and implications for evaluation practice are discussed.

show abstract

Integrating costs and outcomes

Abstract: The need for research that integrates costs and outcomes is asserted, and some of the challenges associated with this research are explored. An emphasis is placed on cost‐effectiveness analysis and development of a mental health outcomes measure appropriate for this technique.

Cited by 2 publications

References 35 publications

How should Program Evaluation Standards inform the use of cost-benefit analysis in evaluation?

How should Program Evaluation Standards inform the use of cost-benefit analysis in evaluation?

Using Economic Methods Evaluatively

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About