Selecting Impact/Outcome Evaluation Designs: A Decision-Making Table and Checklist Approach

This article from Paul Duignan is aimed at supporting evaluators decide which impact/outcome evaluation design is most appropriate to use. A decision-making table approach is provided to assist in the selection of one of the seven possible groups of impact/outcome evaluation.

Furthermore, the guide also supports evaluators to select the best technique for attempting to deal with non-equivalent comparison group issues in constructed matched comparison group designs.

Contents

  • How to use this decision-making table approach
  • The decision to use an impact/outcome evaluation design
  • Impact/outcome evaluation design can be a complex technical decision
  • Preliminary information
  • Decision-making Table 1: Impact/outcome evaluation design selection
  • Four techniques for improving constructed matched comparison impact/outcome designs
  • Decision-making Table 2: Selection of techniques to improve constructed matched comparison group impact/outcome evaluation designs
  • The decision-making tables
  • Table 1: Impact/outcome evaluation design selection
  • Table 2: Selecting techniques to improve constructed matched comparison group designs
  • Checklists for the seven impact/outcome evaluation designs
  • Checklist 1: True experiment design checklist
  • Checklist 2: Regression discontinuity design checklist
  • Checklist 3: Time series analysis design checklist
  • Checklist 4: Constructed matched comparison group design checklist
  • Checklist 5: Exhaustive causal identification and elimination design
  • Checklist 6: Expert judgment design checklist
  • Checklist 7: Key informant judgment design checklist

Source

Duignan, P. (2009). Selecting impact/outcome evaluation designs: a decision-making table and checklist approach. Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base Article No. 256. retrieved from http://www.outcomestheory.org/files/duignan-256-selectingimpactevaluation.pdf

0
No votes yet
Rate this Resource:
A special thanks to this page's contributors
Author
Research Fellow, RMIT University.
Melbourne.

Comments

There are currently no comments. Be the first to comment on this page!

Add new comment

Login Login and comment as BetterEvaluation member or simply fill out the fields below.