Four Types of Policy Evaluation

Most models of policy evaluation ground their analytical perspective in the logical process used to determine the disparity between what was conceptualized by the initial policy goals and what has actually been accomplished by the policy or program as implemented. However, many other models focus their analysis on different objectives such as what is the true purpose of the evaluation, what is the role of the evaluator in the process, how broad or narrow should the scope of the evaluation be, and finally how should the evaluation be organized and conducted, for example what measurement instruments should be employed to determine success or failure. Theodoulou and Kofinis (2004) identify four generic types of the most commonly used policy evaluation typologies and they are: process evaluation, outcome evaluation, impact evaluation, and cost-benefit analysis.

Process Evaluation:

As its name implies this type of evaluation analyzes how well a policy or program is being administered. This type of evaluation is employed more often by program managers to determine what can be done to improve the implementation, the aspects of service delivery, of the program. It does not directly address whether or not the policy or program is achieving the desired outcome or impact on the target population.

Outcome Evaluation:

Theodoulou and Kofinis somewhat confuse the concepts of outputs and outcomes in their discussion of outcome evaluation. Outputs are measures of government activity such as the number of tax returns processed or the number of social security checks sent out each month. Whereas outcomes are normally considered to be the impact that a policy has on a target population, for example, did the policy produce the desired behavioral change initially sought. In this case, the authors state that outcome evaluation is concerned with outputs. For example, if the stated goal of a welfare policy is to reduce the number of people receiving welfare benefits then a determination is made to see if less people are receiving welfare benefits after program implementation then before. However, what this type of evaluation does not indicate is what happened to the people who used to receive the welfare benefits and who have been forced off the system because they are no longer eligible. Did they find employment? Did they find other means of charity? Have they migrated to a life of crime? Outcome evaluation as described by Theodoulou and Kofinis focuses more on the readily available and tangible results of policy. The actual impact of the policy is the subject of the next type of evaluation.