1 |Introduction Evaluation should be simple. It should be as simple as what we do making asking: ‘Is a evaluation is more complex than that. If it was that difference?’ Unfortunately, simple, then there would be no need for this guidance. Imagine you are an architect. It may not be wise to accept a brief that simply said a would want a little more detail and clarity than that. If you ‘build house’. You don’t have that clarity, then that the house you build wouldn’t quite meet it’s quite likely it may not be wise to accept a everyone’s expectations. Similarly, with evaluation, brief that simply instructed you to answer the what we do making a question, ‘is Unless all the components are clearly and properly described, then the difference?’ final evaluation may not meet and may not even be an anyone’s expectations, evaluation at all. The aim of this guidance is to support you to incorporate evaluation ‘good enough’ processes into the planning stages of new interventions. An is any ‘intervention’ activity designed and carried out with the aim of tackling, preventing or reducing prejudice, discrimination, identity-based violence or harassment. There are many forms of evaluation. This guidance is concerned with evaluation processes that allow you to measure the difference your work makes to tackling prejudice, discrimination, identity-based harassment or violence in Britain. Knowing if and how your work makes a difference is important. If your work making a isn’t measurable difference, why do it? This guide is intended to support improved self-evaluation; that is, evaluation that is planned and conducted by the same organisation that is delivering the intervention. It includes several lessons that can also be applied to commissioning an external evaluation. The guidance has been designed to be applied to the evaluation of project-level interventions. However, it should also be useful for partnerships managing or coordinating broader programme-level interventions.
1 |Introduction Evaluation should be simple. It should be as simple as asking: ‘Is what we do making a difference?’ Unfortunately, evaluation is more complex than that. If it was that simple, then there would be no need for this guidance. Imagine you are an architect. It may not be wise to accept a brief that simply said ‘build a house’. You would want a little more detail and clarity than that. If you don’t have that clarity, then it’s quite likely that the house you build wouldn’t quite meet everyone’s expectations. Similarly, with evaluation, it may not be wise to accept a brief that simply instructed you to answer the question, ‘is what we do making a difference?’ Unless all the components are clearly and properly described, then the final evaluation may not meet anyone’s expectations, and may not even be an evaluation at all. The aim of this guidance is to support you to incorporate ‘good enough’ evaluation processes into the planning stages of new interventions. An ‘intervention’ is any activity designed and carried out with the aim of tackling, preventing or reducing prejudice, discrimination, identity-based violence or harassment. There are many forms of evaluation. This guidance is concerned with evaluation processes that allow you to measure the difference your work makes to tackling prejudice, discrimination, identity-based harassment or violence in Britain. Knowing if and how your work makes a difference is important. If your work isn’t making a measurable difference, why do it? This guide is intended to support improved self-evaluation; that is, evaluation that is planned and conducted by the same organisation that is delivering the intervention. It includes several lessons that can also be applied to commissioning an external evaluation. The guidance has been designed to be applied to the evaluation of project-level interventions. However, it should also be useful for partnerships managing or coordinating broader programme-level interventions.
prejudice-unlawful-behaviour-guide-to-evaluation.docx