*Models & Frameworks
CIPP is a comprehensive framework for conducting and reporting evaluations. This model is intended for the use of service providers, such as policy boards, program and project staffs, directors of a variety of services, accreditation officials, college and university administrators, physicians and evaluation specialists. This model is constructed for use in internal evaluations, self-evaluations and contracted external evaluations. It answers four main questions:
- (Context) What needs to be done?
- (Input) How should it be done?
- (Process) Is it being done?
- (Product) Did it succeed?
Patton, M. Q. (2003). Utilization-Focused Evaluation. International Handbook of Educational Evaluation (pp. 223–242). Springer Netherlands.
Tokmak, H. S., Baturay, H. M., & Fadde, P. (2013). Applying the Context, Input, Process, Product Evaluation Model for Evaluation, Research, and Redesign of an Online Master’s Program. The international Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3).
Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and Assessment of Service-learning Programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 57.
this type of framework outlines how change can be achieved to improve the health of a community. A detailed step-wise process of activities are outlined in order to guide the collaborations that will follow.
Chen, H. T. (2012). Theory-driven evaluation: Conceptual framework, application and advancement. Evaluation von Programmen und Projekten für eine demokratische Kultur (pp. 17–40). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Integrated Method of Community Based Evaluation (IMCBE)
IMCBE joins social scientific rigor with an understanding of the elements essential to addressing community members’ and agencies’ need for meaningful outcomes that determine the efficiency and effectiveness of their efforts. This model’s framework promotes a “best fit approach” of adapting the evaluation to the unique problem or intervention to be examined.
It is a multi-method model that gives form to community evaluation. This model: (a) meets the accountability and applied science requirements of clients, funders, stakeholders and other evaluators; (b) recognizes the realities in which community-based programs take place; and (c) provides a context and a process through which people can collectively identify assets, clarify problems, and formulate new visions and solutions (Stringer, 1996).
Telfair, J., & Mulvihill, B. (2000). Bridging Science and Practice. Journal of Community Practice, 7(3), 37–65. doi:10.1300/J125v07n03_03
A process in which people apply evaluation findings and experiences to their work. The focus of this framework is on intended users and it can include a variety of evaluation methods. It is based on the principle that an evaluation should be judged on its usefulness to its users. So an evaluation should be planned in ways that enhance the likely utilizations of the findings and the process to inform decisions and improve performance.
Evaluators should facilitate the evaluation process and design with careful consideration of how everything that is done will affect use. Use pertains to how people in the real world apply evaluation findings and experience the evaluation process. “Focus for this framework is mainly intended use by intended users”. It requires moving from general and potential uses to specific and primary intended users. The evaluator facilitates judgment and decision making by intended users, rather than actin as a distant, independent judge.
Briedenhann, J., & Butts, S. (2005). Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Review of Policy Research, 22(2), 221–243.
Empowerment is a framework for collaborative empowerment and specific enabling activities. It is also a multi-dimensional social process of increasing the capacity of people to make choice and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes. This process allows you to use these choices in your everyday life, community and society, with individuals acting on issues that are important to them.
The empowerment model seeks to return a sense of personal self-worth, to listen to the victim and to allow them to make their own choices, and to support the victim’s process as they move forward and take control their own life.
The empowerment links individual strengths and competencies, helping systems and proactive behaviors to social policy and social change. This mode of intervention links individual well-being with the larger social and political environment. It connects mental health with mutual help to create a responsive community. Empowerment research mainly focuses on identifying capabilities instead of categorizing risk factors and further exploring the environmental influences on social problem instead of blaming the victims.
Fetterman, D., & Wandersman, A. (2007). Empowerment Evaluation: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(2), 179–198.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1994). Empowerment Evaluation, Objectivist Evaluation, and Evaluation Standards: Where the Future of Evaluation Should Not Go and Where It Needs to Go. Evaluation Practice, 15(3), 321–338.