CDC Approach to Program Evaluation

Purpose

Program evaluation is one of the ten essential functions of public health. It can help clarify:

• How to improve existing programs and build upon their strengths.
• Why a program is or is not being implemented as planned or producing intended results.
• Why certain trends or patterns are observed in existing data sources.

Why it's important

Program evaluation helps provide answers to important questions regarding:

• Program implementation: Are program activities being completed as planned?
• Effectiveness: Is the program achieving what was intended?
• Attribution: Did the outcomes achieved happen because of the program?
• Contribution: Are factors that could contribute to outcomes identified?
• Efficiency: Is the program operating using the appropriate resources?

Our approach

CDC uses program evaluation to answer important questions about public health programs through methodical and intentional engagement with interest holders. This can lead to an understanding of the program, what will be evaluated, and how to evaluate it. Program evaluation produces findings that:

• Translate evidence to recommendations for action
• Demonstrate accountability to funders, policymakers, and participants of the program
• Document progress and ensure optimal use of resources
• Help inform decisions about areas for program improvement

Types of Program Evaluations

There are many types of evaluations that can be used for different purposes.

• Formative evaluation is typically conducted to assess whether a program, policy, or organizational approach is feasible, appropriate, and acceptable before it is fully implemented. It can include process or outcome measures and focuses on learning and improvement1.
• Process/Implementation evaluation assesses how well program implementation followed the original plan. It often includes information on content, quality, quantity, and structure of what is being assessed1.
• Outcome evaluation measures how well a program, policy, or organization has achieved its intended outcomes. It cannot determine what caused specific outcomes (causality), only whether they have been achieved1.
• Impact evaluation compares the outcomes of a program, policy, or organization to estimates of what the outcomes would have been without it. It usually seeks to determine whether the activities caused the observed outcomes1.
• Economic evaluation examines programmatic effects relative to program costs. Common approaches include cost analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and cost-utility analysis1.

Difference Between Program Evaluation, Research, Surveillance, and Monitoring

While evaluation is often used interchangeably with these terms that also use systematic approaches to answer questions, they each have their own distinct purpose.

Program Evaluation Compared with Research

Research and evaluation are scientific activities that use similar methods. Research aims to contribute to generalizable knowledge. Evaluation aims to continuously improve organizations, findings, and recommendations for decision making1.

Program Evaluation Compared with Surveillance

Surveillance is the ongoing, systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health-related data2. Surveillance data are often used as data sources for program activities. However, surveillance data alone are often insufficient to answer evaluation questions.

Program Evaluation Compared with Measuring/Monitoring

Performance Measurement is the ongoing monitoring and reporting of program accomplishments, particularly progress toward pre-established goals3. These data can be used to identify increasing or decreasing performance that may warrant further investigation. Program Evaluation helps you to identify the reason behind these changes and potential areas of improvement.