Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practitioner Perceptions of Evaluation in Small Non-Profits

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evaluation in Small Development Non-Profits

  • 185 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores practitioners’ perceptions regarding evaluation and evaluators, bearing in mind community development aspirations and the advantages and constraints facing these small organisations. Cognisant of the first community development standard that expects the infusion of community development values throughout all aspects of practice, this chapter analyses perceptions of evaluation against the evaluation literature. This particularly focuses on the applicability and relevance of traditional ideas about evaluation to small development non-profit contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • AES. (2013). Evaluators’ professional learning competency framework. Australasian Evaluation Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altschuld, J., & Engle, M. (2015). The inexorable historical press of the developing evaluation profession. New Directions for Evaluation, 145, 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bau, V. (2015). Participatory photography for peace: Using images to open up dialogue after violence. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 10(3), 74–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of the theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Camfield, L., Duvendack, M., & Palmer-Jones, R. (2014). Things you wanted to know about bias in evaluations but never dared to think. IDS Bulletin, 45(6), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. (2008). Revolutions in development inquiry. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. (1983/2013). Rural development: Putting the last first. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charity Commission. (2010). Strength in numbers: Small charities experience of working together. Charity Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choudry, A., & Shragge, E. (2011). Disciplining dissent: NGOs and community organizations. Globalizations, 8(4), 503–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2011.585855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, V., & Luke, B. (2018). NGO accountability to beneficiaries: Examining participation in microenterprise development programs. Third Sector Review, 24(2), 77–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, J. (2014). The true impact of evaluation: Motivation for ECB. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013499602.

  • Conley-Tyler, M. (2005). A fundamental choice: Internal or external evaluation? Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 4(1–2), 3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conner, R., Fitzpatrick, J., & Rog, D. (2012). A first step forward: Context assessment. New Directions for Evaluation, 135, 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, E. J. (2005). Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, I., & Brümmer, J. (2015). Professionalisation of evaluation. United Nations Evaluation Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764004269430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2010). The limits of nonprofit impact: A contingency framework for measuring social performance. Social Enterprise Initiative, Harvard Business School, 8(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2010.54500944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensminger, D., Kallemeyn, L., Rempert, T., Wade, J., & Polanin, M. (2015). Case study of an evaluation coaching model: Exploring the role of the evaluator. Evaluation and Program Planning, 49, 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyben, R., & Guijt, I. (2015). Introduction. In R. Eyben, I. Guijt, C. Roche, & C. Shutt (Eds.), Politics of evidence and results in international development: Playing the game to change the rules? (pp. 1–18). Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Festen, M., & Philbin, M. (2007). Level best: How small and grassroots nonprofits can tackle evaluation and talk results. San Francisco: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetterman, D., Kaftarian, A., & Wandersman, A. (Eds.). (2015). Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, A., Thayer, C., & Coghlan, A. (2000). Program evaluation practice in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 10(3), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.10309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, J. (2012). An introduction to context and its role in evaluation practice. New Directions for Evaluation: Context: A Framework for Its Influence on Evaluation Practice, 135, 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, M. (2016). Gramsci’s critique of civil society: Towards a new concept of hegemony. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Funnell, S., & Rogers, P. (2011). Purposeful program theory: Effective use of theories of change and logic models. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fushimi, K. (2018). The puzzle of the universal utilization of the logical framework approach: An explanation using the sociological new institutional perspective (Literature review No. 14). Tokyo: JICA Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbutt, A. (2013). Monitoring and evaluation: A guide for small and diaspora NGOs. PLP—The Peer Learning Programme for Small and Diaspora Organisations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodkind, J., Amer, S., Christian, C., Hess, J., Bybee, D., Isakson, B., … Shantzek, C. (2017). Challenges and innovations in a community-based participatory randomized controlled trial. Health Education and Behavior, 44(1), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198116639243.

  • Gramsci, A. (1930/1992). Prison notebooks volume 1 (Edited with an introduction by J. A. Buttigieg). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. (2016). How change happens. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grieve, M. (2014). Shared measurement: Advancing evaluation of community development outcomes. In N. Cytron, K. Pettit, & G. T. Kingsley (Eds.), What counts: Harnessing data for America’s communities (pp. 278–295). San Francisco: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco & the Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, E. (2019). The great nonprofit evaluation reboot: A new approach every staff member can understand. Pleasant View: CharityChannel LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • IDEAS. (2012). Competencies for development evaluation evaluators, managers, and commissioners. International Development Evaluation Association. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzggS7JkIKT6em0yYTFxU3oydTg/view.

  • Ife, J. (2016). Community development in an uncertain world: Vision, analysis and practice (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, A., & Wilford, R. (2010). Listen First: A pilot system for managing downward accountability in NGOs. Development in Practice, 20(7), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2010.508113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K., Greenseid, L., Toal, S., King, J., Lawrenz, F., & Volkov, B. (2009). Research on evaluation use. American Journal of Evaluation, 30(3), 377–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, S., & Connors, P. (2017). Developing communities for the future (5th ed.). South Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability for empowerment: Dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Development, 34(6), 951–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.11.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labin, S., Duffy, J., Meyers, D., Wandersman, A., & Lesesne, C. (2012). A research synthesis of the evaluation capacity building literature. American Journal of Evaluation, 33(3), 307–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214011434608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaFrance, J., Nichols, R., & Kirkhart, K. (2012). Culture writes the script: On the centrality of context in indigenous evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 135, 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, M. (2013). People power participation: Living community development. Melbourne: Borderlands Cooperative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lennie, J., & Tacchi, J. (2014). Bridging the divide between upward accountability and learning-based approaches to development evaluation: Strategies for an enabling environment. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 14(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X1401400103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markiewicz, A., & Patrick, I. (2016). Developing monitoring and evaluation frameworks. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, L., & Tice, K. (2002). Paradoxes of professionalization: Parallel dilemmas in women’s organizations in the Americas. Gender and Society, 16(6), 941–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, A., Rose, D., & Connolly, M. (2013). Developing evaluation cultures in human service organisations. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 13(1), 15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naccarella, L., Pirkis, J., Kohn, F., Morley, B., Burgess, P., & Blashki, G. (2007). Building evaluation capacity: Definitional and practical implications from an Australian case study. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(3), 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2007.05.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2012). Essentials of utilization-focused evaluation. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, T., & Muniz, S. (2018). Fifty years of practice and innovation: Participatory video (PV). In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of communication for development and social change (pp. 1–17). Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rog, D. (2012). When background becomes foreground: Toward context-sensitive evaluation practice. New Directions for Evaluation, 135, 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, A., & Gullickson, A. (2018). Evaluation champions: A literature review. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 14(30), 46–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, C., Clarke, A., McConnell, C., Lachapelle, P., & Stansfield, J. (2018). Towards shared international standards for community development practice. Glasgow: International Association of Community Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russ-Eft, D., Bober, M., de la Teja, I., Foxon, M., & Koszalka, T. (2008). Evaluator competencies: Standards for the practice of evaluation in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt, T. (2005). The centrality of practice to evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1), 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. (1996). Types of evaluation and types of evaluator. Evaluation Practice, 17(2), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springett, J., & Wallerstein, N. (2008). Issues in participatory evaluation. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcome (2nd ed., pp. 199–220). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevahn, L., King, J., Ghere, G., & Minnema, J. (2005). Establishing essential competencies for program evaluators. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1), 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stufflebeam, D., & Coryn, C. (2014). Evaluation theory, models, and applications (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton-Brown, C. (2014). Photovoice: A methodological guide. Photography and Culture, 7(2), 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, C., Torgerson, D., & Taylor, C. (2015). Randomized controlled trials. In K. Newcomer, H. Hatry, & J. Wholey (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (4th ed., pp. 158–176). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trickett, E. (2011). Community-based participatory research as worldview or instrumental strategy: Is it lost in translation(al) research? American Journal of Public Health, 101(8), 1353–1355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vo, A., & Christie, C. (2015). Advancing research on evaluation through the study of context. In P. Brandon (Ed.), New directions for evaluation: Research on evaluation (Issue 148, pp. 43–55). https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20156.

  • Volkov, B. (2008). A bumpy journey to evaluation capacity: A case study of evaluation capacity building in a private foundation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(3), 175–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarbrough, D., Shulha, L., Hopson, R., & Caruthers, F. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia

    Leanne M. Kelly

Authors
  1. Leanne M. Kelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leanne M. Kelly .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kelly, L.M. (2021). Practitioner Perceptions of Evaluation in Small Non-Profits. In: Evaluation in Small Development Non-Profits. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58979-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation