# data[].attributes.body
Improvement/Accountability-Oriented
Evaluation Approach (emphasize assessment of merit and worth)

- Meant to prove an organization is meeting the requirements of the profession/service area and whether they are fit to serve their designated function
- Feedback identifies areas of improvement
- Organizers are criteria accredited or certified body has adopted
- KEY ? = "Are institutions and their programs and personnel meeting minimum standards, and how can their performance be improved?"
- Methods: self-reporting or self-study by institution where expert panels visit, verify self-report, and gather info., or individual using criteria set by accrediting agency
- Started with College Entrance Examination Board in 1901
- Meant for organizations providing professional service where potential risk to public is possible if services not provided by highly trained specialists
- Major advantage = aids layperson in making informed judgments about quality of program
- Disadvantage = emphasize inputs/processes but not outcomes. Process of self-study can open opportunity for corruption by organization

# data[].attributes.headline
Summary of Approach 19: Client-Centered Studies (or Responsive Evaluation)

# data[].attributes.subject
Summary of Approach 19: Client-Centered Studies (or Responsive Evaluation)

# data[].attributes.body
Social Agenda/Advocacy Approach (making a difference through program evaluation ensuring equal access)
-  Client-centered because evaluator works with and to support a diverse clientele
- They support, develop, administer, or directly operate the programs under study and seek or get evaluators' advice in understanding and improving programs
- Contrasted with consumer-oriented approach that uses objective/independent assessors --> this approach embraces local autonomy and helps people already involved in the program to evaluate it and use it for improvement
- Subjective information is preferred, leaving interpretation to the actual evaluators/clients
- Defining adjectives = pluralistic, flexible, interactive, holistic, subjective, constructivist, service-oriented
- Seeks no final authoritative conclusion - prizes collection of of often conflicting perspectives
- Advanced organizers = stakeholders' concerns in program, program's rationale, background, transactions, outcomes, standards, and judgments
- Purposes = helping local people gain comprehensive understanding of program, understand how different groups view strengths and weakness of program and value it, and ways program experts judge it
- Promotes equity and fairness that helps those with little power
- Key ? = what has the program achieved, how has it operated, and how was it judged?
- Informal/intuitive evaluation
- Methods = case study, expressive objectives, purpose sampling, observation, adversary reports, storytelling/narrative reports
- #1 condition is a receptive client group and confident and competent evaluator
- Strength = involves action research where people in the organization are taught how to help improve their own program
- Weakness = vulnerability of external credibility

# data[].attributes.headline
Summary of Approach 20: Constructivist Evaluation

# data[].attributes.subject
Summary of Approach 20: Constructivist Evaluation

# data[].attributes.body
- Philosophical, service oriented, and paradigm-driven
- Subjectivist epistemology where evaluators are the evaluation's "human instruments"
- Insists evaluators be 100% ethical to respect and advocate for clients, especially disenfranchised
- Must respect participants' free will to help them be energized, informed, and assisted to transform their program
- Stakeholders play a key role throughout
- Balances qualitative and quantitative methods
- Rejects any absolutist search for correct answers
- Main purpose = determine and make sense of variety of constructions that exist or merge among stakeholders
- All evaluation conclusions are indeterminate, knowing there is always a possibility of finding a better answer
- Through the use of hermeneutics, the evaluator collects and describes alternative individual constructions on an evaluation question or issue, ensuring
- Key ?s = emerge in process of discussing the study's rationale and obtaining multiple perspectives of the program
that each depiction meets with the respondent’s approval
- Advantages = fully discloses whole process and findings. People are more likely to value/implement this because they are involved in its development. Involves full range of stakeholders and is educational for all involved, despite conclusion
- Disadvantages = difficult to produce timely reports needed from funding agencies and decision makers. Requires participation of many stakeholders and can sometimes be unrealistic and is burdened with stakeholder turnover

# data[].attributes.body
I apologize I could not figure out how to get access for my camera and audio for this website (I have a lot of security blockers). I believe this would be a great approach for our organization because the assessors have different assessment tools and ways of assessing the children. Having a client based evaluation can help the assessors to determine the effectiveness and the customers perceptions of the evaluation tools and activities that the assessor does, determining the effectiveness and comfortability of the clients.

# data[].attributes.body
I think approach 19 would work best for our non-profit (South African Orphanage) because the orphanage is looking to increase its local involvement. Currently, the orphanage relies on international donors, directors, and volunteers. They hope to gain local donors, directors, and volunteers to ensure sustainability. Approach 19 looks at what the program has achieved and how well it is operated. It gives local stakeholders a comprehensive understanding of the program’s strengths and weaknesses. This evaluation will show local stakeholders what they are investing in.

# data[].attributes.headline
I am the 4th member of this group! Kim did an amazing job representing the client-centered approach. Using this approach demonstrates the goals toward the clients and qualitative and quantitative approaches they use to show their data. As she mentioned, with anything being evaluated, time and independence needs to be looked at very carefully.

# data[].attributes.subject
I am the 4th member of this group! Kim did an amazing job representing the client-centered approach. Using this approach demonstrates the goals toward the clients and qualitative and quantitative approaches they use to show their data. As she mentioned, with anything being evaluated, time and independence needs to be looked at very carefully.

# data[].attributes.body
-Sarah Seaford

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Team Wild - Caterina - Constructivist Evaluation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Team Wild - Caterina - Constructivist Evaluation

# data[].attributes.body
This approach seems like it would be useful for an evaluation tool for our nonprofit. Our nonprofit seeks to provide a performing arts outreach program and could be categorized under service oriented. I like that this approach also allows for an adjustment in practice based on the evaluation results.

# data[].attributes.body
The Client-Centered approach works best for the group we are evaluating because they are a relatively new non-profit, and this evaluation process builds in support for development and with operation of programs, which are still in progress. The flexible nature allows room for evolution to the process as they continue to build their infrastructure and work towards their goals.  Since they are still in development, it also helps that this approach does not include a final conclusion - this is a work in progress.

Laurie Bowen

# data[].attributes.body
I think this would be a great approach for our organization (FuturesLab) because it is client-centered and supports the organization improving their own program.

# data[].attributes.body
Since our nonprofit focuses on providing performing art opportunities to students in Title I schools and lower income schools through their outreach program, the client centered approach is appropriate. PAA, the performing arts academy, focuses on gaining diverse clientele through offering outreach programs in Title I schools as well as offering tuition classes in suburban areas. All students are eligible for financial aid as well which also makes the Client Centered Evaluation appropriate. The client centered evaluation focuses on programs wanting to make a difference which is what PAA strives to do through arts education. It does not seek to collect prizes or win awards. It seeks only to empower kids. (Kelly)

# data[].attributes.headline
I think that Approach 19 would work best for our organization, and would be a pretty good fit! Our organization is relatively new and is looking to grow to support more hospitals and in new ways. The responsive and individualized nature of this really would focus on the needs, factors, and goals of the team. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I think that Approach 19 would work best for our organization, and would be a pretty good fit! Our organization is relatively new and is looking to grow to support more hospitals and in new ways. The responsive and individualized nature of this really would focus on the needs, factors, and goals of the team. 

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Approach 18 is the best for our non profit- Nestled in the NICU. This Non-profit provides families of preterm a babies a hospital bag. This approach would be helpful in that they can look at if they are meeting a need/function for the families. The self reporting piece is also helpful or our specific non profit because of HIPPA they cannot pass the bags out to the specific families. This is also helpful because of the ability to put the evaluation together yourself, because our non profit is a smaller/ newer organization.