MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994567589 · doi:10.56645/jmde.v13i28.462

Translating Project Achievements into Strategic Plans: A Case Study in Utilization-Focused Evaluation

2017· article· en· W2994567589 on OpenAlexaff
Ricardo Ramı́rez, Galin Kora, Dal Brodhead

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess managementProgram evaluationStrategic planningManagement scienceEngineering managementBusinessPolitical scienceEngineeringPublic administrationMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Utilization-focused evaluation (UFE) is a decision-making framework intended to design and implement evaluations that get utilized. In this case study, the UFE approach was applied to the evaluation of a youth training and employment program in Kenya. Purpose: Analyze a case study based on empirical experience with the lens of evaluation use and influence. Setting: Nairobi and other urban and peri-urban settings, Kenya. Intervention: The evaluation of a youth training and employment program that provided direct training for marginalized youth as well as capacity building for employment and adapted a Basic Employability Skills Training (BEST) model from India. Research design: Analysis of a case study to describe: how the evaluation approach provided enabling factors for funders and grantees to turn evaluation into a learning intervention; the benefit of clarifying a project’s theory of change; and learning how to combine summative and developmental evaluation. Data collection and analysis: A case study based on an evaluation consultancy. The evaluation included site visits, extensive documentation review, qualitative and quantitative data collection. Findings: The ‘facilitation of use’ (a step in UFE) provided a bridge between a summative and a developmental evaluation. The evaluators and program partners developed a learning relationship wherein the evidence influenced the subsequent project design and strategy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.086
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0860.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.638
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.029 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MultiDisciplinary EvaluationSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207