A socio-political framework for evaluability assessment of participatory evaluations of partnerships: Making sense of the power differentials in programs that involve the state and civil society

Evaluation

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 246-259

  Laperrière, Hélène ^a   Potvin, Louise ^b   Zúñiga, Ricardo ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

civil society; community based organization; evaluability assessment; participatory evaluation; partnerships; program evaluation; public health; sociology of organization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860177632     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: 14617153     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356389012442445     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Analyse des pratiques d'évaluation dans les organismes communautaires. Montréal: Services aux collectivités de l'UQAM; 2005:.
2. Beaudry J,Gauthier BRecherche sociale: de la problématique à la collecte de données. 1992) L'évaluation de programme. In: GauthierB (ed.) Recherche sociale: de la problématique à la collecte de données, 2nd edn.Sainte-Foy: PUQ, 425-52.Gauthier B, ed. Sainte-Foy: PUQ; 1992:425-52.
3. Burton P.Conceptual, theoretical & practical issues in measuring the benefits of public participation.Evaluation. 2009;15 (3): 263-84.
4. Cousins JB,Whitmore EUnderstanding and Practicing Participatory Evaluation. Whitmore E, ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1998:5-23.
5. Detienne M,Vernant JPLes ruses de l'intelligence. La mètis des Grecs. Paris: Flammarion; 1975:.
6. Ellis C,Bochner APCollecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. 2003) Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: researcher as subject. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 199-258.Denzin NKLincoln YS, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003:199-258.
7. Friedberg E.L'analyse sociologique des organisations.POUR. 1972;28:1-120.
8. Friedberg ELe pouvoir et la règle. Paris: du Seuil; 1997:.
9. Friedberg E.Going Beyond the Either/Or.Journal of Management and Governance. 2000;4 (2): 35-52.
10. Friedberg E.La culture 'nationale' n'est pas tout le social. Réponse à Philippe d'Iribarne.Revue Française de Sociologie. 2005a;46 (1): 177-93.
11. Friedberg E.Qu'apporte la sociologie au management des organisations?. Seminar at the Centre Humanismes Gestions et Mondialisation, Hautes Études Commerciales; 2005b. Montreal.
12. Guba EG,Lincoln YSFourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE; 1989:.
13. House ER.The role of the evaluator in a political world.The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 2004;19 (2): 1-16.
14. House ER,Howe KRValues in Evaluation and Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 1999:.
15. Jacob S,Rothmayr CApproches et pratiques en évaluation de programme. Ridde VDagenais C, ed. Montréal: PUM; 2009:69-86.
16. Jalbert Y,Pinault L,Renaud G,Zúñiga REpsilon. A Self-Evaluation Guide for Community Organizations. Montreal: Coalition des Organismes de Lutte Contre le Sida (COCQ-sida); 1997:.
17. LaperrièreH (2008) Evaluation of STD/HIV/AIDS peer-education and dangerousness: a local perspective. Ciência e saúde coletiva13(6): 1817-24. URL: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-81232008000600016&lng=en.
18. Laperrière H.Une pratique réflexive collective de production de connaissances dans la lutte communautaire contre le VIH/sida au Québec.Nouvelles Pratiques Sociales. 2009a;22 (1): 77-91.
19. Laperrière H.Les inégalités entre le local et le national: le cas de l'évaluation qualitative de la lutte communautaire contre le VIH/sida au Québec.Recherches Qualitatives. 2009b;28 (3): 88-111.
20. Laperrière H,Zúñiga R.Sociopolitical determinants of an AIDS prevention program: multiple actors and vertical relationships of control and influence.Policy, Politics and Nursing Practice. 2006;7 (2): 125-35.
21. Latour BRe-assembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005:.
22. Leviton LC,Khan LK,Rog D,Dawkins N,Cotton D.Evaluability assessment to improve public health policies, programs, and practices.Annual Review of Public Health. 2010;31:213-33.
23. Mantoura P,Gendron S,Potvin L.The space of participatory research: a tool for implementing innovative and health-promoting local socio-sanitary alliances.Health and Place. 2007;13:440-51.
24. March JGLa décision. Friedberg E, ed. Paris: Banlieues Media Editions; 2004a:.
25. March JGLa décision. Friedberg E, ed. Paris: Banlieues Media Editions; 2004b:.
26. Meeres SL,Fisher R,Gerrard N.Evaluability assessment of a community-based program.The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 1995;10 (1): 103-21.
27. Mercer SL,Goel V.Program evaluation in the absence of goals: a comprehensive approach to the evaluation of a population-based breast cancer screening Program.The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 1994;9 (1): 98-112.
28. Miles MB,Huberman AMQualitative Data Analysis. 1994) Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 1994:.
29. Mintzberg H,Ahlstrand B,Lampel JSafari en pays stratégie. L'exploration des grands courants de la pensée stratégique. Paris: Village Mondial; 1999:.
30. Plottu B,Plottu E.Approches to participation in evaluation: some conditions to implementation.Evaluation. 2009;15 (3): 343-59.
31. Polanyi MPersonal Knowledge. Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. New York: Harper & Row; 1964:.
32. The Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada. Strengthening Federal Action in the Canadian Response to HIV/AIDS. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada; 2004:.
33. Public Health Agency of Canada (2006) AIDS Community Action Program (ACAP) Grants and Contribution Allocation Project 2005 - Final Report. Ottawa: PHAC. URL (consulted 7 September 2009): http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/aids-sida/publication/reports/acap-pacs/acap-pacs-eng.php.
34. Public Health Agency of Canada (2009) Federal Initiatives to address HIV/AIDS in Canada: National Funding [date modified 2009-02-18]. Ottawa: PHAC. URL (consulted 7 September 2009): http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/aids-sida/funding/index-eng.php#chvi.
35. Ridde V.Suggestions d'améliorations d'un cadre conceptuel de l'évaluation participative.The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 2006;21 (2): 1-23.
36. Rootman I,Steinmetz B.Groupe de travail européen sur l'évaluation de la promotion de la santé.Bulletin de recherche sur les politiques de santé. 2002;1 (3): 8-9.
37. Springett JEvaluation in Health Promotion. Principles and Perspectives. Rootman IGoodstadt MHyndman BMcQueen DVPotvin LSpringett J, ed. Copenhague: WHO Regional Publications; 2001:83-105.
38. Suárez-Herrera J,Springett J,Kagan C.Critical connections between participatory evaluation, organizational learning and intentional change in pluralistic organizations.Evaluation. 2009;15 (3): 321-42.
39. Thurston WE,Potvin L.Evaluability assessment: a tool for incorporating evaluation in social change programmes.Evaluation. 2003;9 (4): 453-69.
40. Thurston WE,Graham J,Hatfield J.Evaluability assessment: a catalyst for program change and improvement.Evaluation & the Health Professionals. 2003;26 (2): 206-21.
41. Wendhausen AO duplo sentido do controle social: (des)caminhos da participação em saúde. Itajaí: Univali; 2002:.
42. Wholey JSEvaluation Research and Practice: Comparative and International Perspectives. Levin RASolomon MAHelistern G-MWollmann H, ed. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE; 1981:.
43. Wholey JS,Hatry HP,Newcomer KEHandbook of Practical Program Evaluation. Wholey JSHatry HPNewcomer KE, ed. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass; 1994:15-39.
44. Savoir-faire et savoir-dire: un guide d'évaluation communautaire. Zúñiga RLuly MH, ed. Montréal: COCQ-sida; 2005:.