Download the full Evaluation Guide as a pdf documentAnnex 3
Your Health, Your Care, Your Say - a case example of evaluation1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9
The process of working out the criteria against which the engagement initiative will be assessed can be extremely helpful in clarifying the objectives at the earliest stages of planning. For example, thinking through the practical implications of testing the extent to which the process involved ‘working in partnership’ with the public, and how that could be measured, should affect the choice of methods (which methods will deliver those outcomes) and the overall design, timing and resourcing of the process. This will help ensure that the appropriate process is designed, and methods used, that will fully deliver on the stated objectives.
Doing the evaluation – what should it cover?
The full report of the YHYCYS initiative covered all the elements outlined in the main framework (pages 12 - 13), except for Inputs (costs) as these were seen to be outside the scope of the evaluation (although interviewees were asked whether they thought the process represented money well spent).
The evaluation report covered:
- The methodology of the evaluation itself, with annexes providing detail on the brief, the interview process and the questions asked of interviewees;
- The objectives of the engagement process and summary of the main outputs / activities (which included descriptions of the different methods);
- The background and context for the engagement process (e.g. noting that local primary care trusts and strategic health authorities had been conducting major public consultations locally at the same time on restructuring - with implications for jobs and local services - which affected the willingness of these institutions to run local YHYCYS consultations);
- The extent to which each objective in turn was met (including the implicit objective), which included coverage of levels of involvement, who was involved in the different processes, methods used and outcomes;
- Lessons for the future including what worked well, what worked less well, and specific lessons on levels of engagement, representation, commitment and integrity, costs, timing, trust, policy iteration and integration of the results of the engagement.