Auditors’ understanding of evidence: A performance audit of an urban development programme
- 23 June 2011
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Evaluation
- Vol. 17 (3), 217-231
- https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389011410523
Abstract
Despite the potential advantages of a closer link between planning evaluation and programme evaluation , both fields have been developed independently. This is mainly due to significant differences between them, particularly in terms of historical background, evaluation scope and contexts, the articulation between theory and practice, and the timings of evaluation. This article advocates bridging the gap between these two fields, and presents the Plan-Process-Results (PPR) methodology as an example of, and a contribution to, this bridging process. PPR is a methodology for evaluating planning and plan implementation, integrating elements from three types of planning evaluation, based on rationality ex-ante, performance and conformance.Keywords
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Transaction Cost-Based Approach to Partnership Performance EvaluationEvaluation, 2008
- Evaluating the Early Excellence InitiativeEvaluation, 2005
- Utilizing Evaluation Evidence to Enhance Professional PracticeEvaluation, 2004
- The Emerging Gap between Evaluation Research and PracticeEvaluation, 2003
- On The Nature Of Audit Judgements: The Case Of Value For Money StudiesPublic Administration, 1999
- Formative and Process Evaluation of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention ProgramsEvaluation Review, 1993
- A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS?Public Administration, 1991
- Do You Want a Performance Audit or a Program Evaluation?Public Administration Review, 1990
- Formative and summative evaluation: Parody or paradox?New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1987
- The Many Meanings of Research UtilizationPublic Administration Review, 1979