There
are several types of policy evaluation. However, focusing on the real sense of
policy review, this study identifies five types, namely, process evaluation,
prospective evaluation, efficiency evaluation, impact evaluation, and
comprehensive evaluation
Evaluation as a review technique has always enjoyed the support of policy makers. The logic of this action hinges on the role of policy evaluation as discussed hereunder.
At another level, evaluation allows policy makers to confront the problems of poor resource allocation. The assessment of alternatives helps policy implementers to choose among competing social objectives, a policy an available resources can execute. Thus, each choice is given full consideration in terms of justice, equity, and political reality. The consideration focuses on the resources that are required to attain programme objective. These resources include the cost, personnel and incentives required at any time to realize policy objectives.
Process Evaluation (Programme
Activities)
This is the review of policy on the basis of what is designed or originally planned. The focus here is on policy implementation and its real practice. Posvac and Carey (1980: 12) note that, process evaluation monitors an existing programme to assess the effort put into it. In this perspective, evaluation hinges on the ongoing project in a bid to determine its success of failure. Further, as Patton (1990:94) puts, process evaluation is a focus on how something happens rather than on the outcomes or results obtained. Process evaluation is concerned with the components of the policy programme. It looks further on how the programme is delivered the availability of adequate personnel and other resources required to implementing policies.
This is the review of policy on the basis of what is designed or originally planned. The focus here is on policy implementation and its real practice. Posvac and Carey (1980: 12) note that, process evaluation monitors an existing programme to assess the effort put into it. In this perspective, evaluation hinges on the ongoing project in a bid to determine its success of failure. Further, as Patton (1990:94) puts, process evaluation is a focus on how something happens rather than on the outcomes or results obtained. Process evaluation is concerned with the components of the policy programme. It looks further on how the programme is delivered the availability of adequate personnel and other resources required to implementing policies.
In carrying out evaluation under the ‘process” the following are reviewed:
programme guidelines, the organization of field and offices, staff training,
communication system, and staff morale. Furthermore, process evaluation uses
empirical data to assess the delivery of programmes. Accordingly, Scheirer
(1994:40) notes that process evaluation verifies
what the programme is, and whether or not it is delivered as intended to the
targeted recipients and in the intended “dosage”.
In order to undertake process measurement, the programme itself must be
specified in detail. This forces clear thinking and planning during programme
development. The focus is what the programme is, why it is expected to produce
its result; for what type of people it may be effective and in what
circumstances. In sum, process evaluation is considered fundamental because it
opens up the “black box” behind a programme label to reveal the realities of
its day-to-day programme delivery. Essentially, it aims at improving, guiding,
and enhancing implementation as a way of realizing expected results. Above all,
it further helps in the modification and specification of future policy.
Prospective Evaluation
This
is an assessment of policy in relation to achieving the objective of its
formulation. It reviews the capacity and feasibility of a policy before it is
implemented. This anti-implementation evaluation strategy is recent and
determines the programme alternative that best achieves higher benefit
performance and results. Ikelegbe (1996:155) notes that prospective evaluation
demands better policies and better policy performance from both governments and
the public. Prospective evaluation is future oriented. The focus is to
determine how successful a given policy will achieve its target. Prospective
evaluation is popular among policy makers by virtue of its usefulness in
amending and resolving hitches and conflicts that may arise in the
implementation process. By this evaluation procedure, policy actors are
equipped with enough information and data required for successful policy
application.
Efficiency Evaluation (Expenditures)
The concern of efficiency evaluation is a review to determine, and if minimum resources are used to achieve the desired outcome. This strategy of evaluation is comparative. Two questions are usually apparent; what is the ratio of benefits to cost in this programme? Given what we spent, did we get result out of it? These stems from the fact that efficient implementation is only determined when two or more policies are evaluated with the same criteria. For example, to determine the efficiency of executing Universal Basic Education in Nigeria, every benefiting community should be provided with uniform resources. Against this backdrop, the evaluation can assess the efficiency of the projects in relation to the purposes such programmes are made to serve.
However, two major techniques are used to address this: cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Both techniques focus on the problem of resources allocation, since according to Leslie A. Pal, the issue of efficiency in public program is really the issue of alternative and superior allocation of scarce resources (Pal, 1997)
The concern of efficiency evaluation is a review to determine, and if minimum resources are used to achieve the desired outcome. This strategy of evaluation is comparative. Two questions are usually apparent; what is the ratio of benefits to cost in this programme? Given what we spent, did we get result out of it? These stems from the fact that efficient implementation is only determined when two or more policies are evaluated with the same criteria. For example, to determine the efficiency of executing Universal Basic Education in Nigeria, every benefiting community should be provided with uniform resources. Against this backdrop, the evaluation can assess the efficiency of the projects in relation to the purposes such programmes are made to serve.
However, two major techniques are used to address this: cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Both techniques focus on the problem of resources allocation, since according to Leslie A. Pal, the issue of efficiency in public program is really the issue of alternative and superior allocation of scarce resources (Pal, 1997)
The logic of
cost-benefit analysis centers on the monetary value and relevance to the
society. Efficiency evaluation declares a policy efficient or inefficient by
measuring the computed benefits as well as cost of a particular policy
programme. Cost-benefit analysis relies on a social welfare criterion known as
“pareto optimality”. This criterion states that a change is worthwhile if at
least one person is made better off while no one else is worse off.
On the other hand, cost-effectiveness analysis is closely related to
cost-benefit analysis and shares some similar concepts ... Cost-effectiveness
analysis restricts itself to comparing different policy programme alternatives
for achieving a given set of goals’. The analysis considers the cost
implication of realizing policy objectiveness. The application of cost
effective analysis considers money cost in evaluation. The money cost includes
the budget cost and economic cost. At efficiency evaluation, a programme is
efficient if it takes a less cost, to execute the same policy that cost more
money.
Impact Evaluation
As governments are under pressure to be more result- oriented, Impact
evaluation stands out in finding the solutions. An impact evaluation of
implemented policies looks more towards consumer or client satisfaction as an
outcome. Impact evaluation is retrospective in character, hence concerned with
determining how well a programme has been doing. The question here is: did the
policy achieve the . intended effects? If not, why? The impact evaluation
provides the public administrator with information regarding” the impact of
programme, its implementation
and its management; it also measures ongoing problems. It should be noted that
Impact evaluations is to measure programme impRt5 is relation to intended
purposes or objectives. Furthermore, this evaluative strategy determines the
effects of programmes on the target or policy community. The consequences and
results of policy programme are determined through impact studies. The
executives and legislators appreciate impact evaluation because it focuses on
whether or not a public programme is doing what it is supposed to do.
Comprehensive Evaluation
This brand of policy evaluation combines other evaluation methods. They include,
process evaluation, efficiency evaluation, impact evaluation and prospective
evaluation. Essentially, it adopts a rational approach in evaluation of public
programme. By virtue of its approach, it has advantage of proving and
contributing more encompassing information on critical aspects of
implementation. It is holistic, wider in scope and overhauls other variables in
the review process. Comprehensive evaluation is criticized for being too
rigorous and very difficult to engage.
However, to achieve successful results through
evaluation, Williams David (1973:67), identities ten procedures. They are:
- Examination and overview of the programmes development, history, target population context services, funding, etc.
- Identification, elaboration, classification and operationalisation of objectives.
- Investigation of The costs and consequences of the programme, the output, impact and performance.
- Elaboration of critical concepts and the determination of the tools and methods of evaluation, particularly the measures of Performance;
- Information of the evaluation problem and the research design.
- Collection of relevant programme and environmental data and the analysis of data based on critical evaluation question and conceptual relationships.
- Measurement of performance particularly the application of performance and impact indicators to programme data
- Determination and explanation of levels of performance and impact.
- Consideration and choice of crucial evaluation decision on the continuation, determination or modification of programmes, projects activities and operations.
- The consideration and determination of opportunity costs and future consequences of evaluation decisions.
2.9 THE
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC POLICY EVALUATION
Evaluation as a review technique has always enjoyed the support of policy makers. The logic of this action hinges on the role of policy evaluation as discussed hereunder.
First, policy evaluation enhances accountability of
programmes. As policy programmes are reviewed, the implementers are motivated
to be steadfast in policy implementation. Equally, the interest groups, clients
and citizens enhance accountability through participation. The action propels
administrators to remain result oriented as policies are executed.
At another level, evaluation allows policy makers to confront the problems of poor resource allocation. The assessment of alternatives helps policy implementers to choose among competing social objectives, a policy an available resources can execute. Thus, each choice is given full consideration in terms of justice, equity, and political reality. The consideration focuses on the resources that are required to attain programme objective. These resources include the cost, personnel and incentives required at any time to realize policy objectives.
Evaluation further provides information on •an
existing programme. This assists policy advocates in pushing and lobbying for
or against a new or an old programme. To this end, information obtained through
evaluation enhances support or continuity of new and old prorgammes. Whereas
the information goes contrary to the objectives and goals of public programmes,
evaluation aids the policy modification. On this backdrop, information is
essential for decisions on improved performance of programmes.
Evaluation of public programmes enhances the feedback
mechanism in policy process. As the collation of data in public programmes
progresses, evaluators examine results, activities and impact of each programme
on the public. The information derived from the available data enables
stakeholders to assess the performance of a public policy or determine the
extent such a policy has attained its objectives. In the process, the policy is
better understood and this enables administrators, to make decisions on the
activities of the policy. The inputs of policy implementers are considered at
the “black box” for necessary amendments during policy formulation. As
evaluation maintains I policy process, Leslie A. Pal (1997:258-259) asserts
that:
Evaluation serves
the vital function of pro viding empirical
feedback on those hypotheses in action.’ Did they work, what impact did
intervention have? At what cost? It is for this that public policy theory urges
the integration of the policy process evaluation into every stage of policy
process; since evaluation in a sense is the collective memory of what worked
and what did not, integration of that information can save errors and effort.
Finally, evaluation provides changes and modifications
in the management of public policy. The changes affect administrative capacity
processes and operations. In summary, evaluation determines appropriateness,
feasibility, costs and benefits of a proposed programme which are crucial in
the design formulation and establishment of policy programmes in a polity.
- PROBLEMS OF POLICY EVALUATION - PUBLIC POLICY
- POLICY EVALUATION TECHNIQUES - PUBLIC POLICY
- TYPES POLICY EVALUATION - PUBLIC POLICY
- POLICY EVALUATION - PUBLIC POLICY
- DETERMINANTS OF POLICY IMPLEMENTATION RESULTS - PU...
- POLICY IMPLEMENTATION STAGE - PUBLIC POLICY
- STAGES OF POLICY FORMULATION - PUBLIC POLICY
- POLICY FORMULATION - PUBLIC POLICY
- PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION IN PUBLIC POLICY
- PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS
- THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO PUBLIC POLICY STUDY
- FEATURES OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
- THE PROCESS OF POLICY ANALYSIS
- CONCEPT OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
- EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
- RELEVANCE OF STUDYING PUBLIC POLICY
- WHAT ARE THE TYPES OF PUBLIC POLICY
- WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF PUBLIC POLICY
- WHAT IS THE MEANING OF PUBLIC POLICY
- FUNDAMENTALS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION