What is Process Evaluation?

Evaluating
Social
Marketing
Campaigns
EMERSON COLLEGE SUMMER INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL
MARKETING AND HEALTH COMMUNICATION
JUNE 9, 2016
Wotan’s Ravens
Types of Evaluation
 Formative
 Process
*Delivery/Implementation
*Exposure/Reach
 Outcome (AKA summative
or impact)
Important Principles of
Evaluation

Start thinking about and planning
for evaluation from the first day

Build it into your budget

Look for ways to conduct
evaluation economically
Purpose of Formative
Evaluation

Gathering information to making
good choices about audiences,
concepts, messages, channels, and
materials

Formative research becomes the
foundation for all important decisions
made throughout a social marketing
initiative
Formative Evaluation
Methods
 Surveys
 One-on-one
interviews
 Intercept
 Expert
interviews
reviews
 Readability
 Focus
exploratory
testing
groups
Cutting Costs with Focus
Groups

If you need to gather information
beyond a single geographic region
or gathering people proves a
challenge, consider conducting
telephone, online, or Webcam
groups

Get a partner to donate
something other than cash that
can be used as an incentive
Cutting Costs with Focus
Groups (cont.)

Send someone from your own
team for moderator training

Find an inexpensive location to
conduct the groups (church,
community center, etc.)

If taping is needed, contact a local
educational institution
Common Mistakes with
Formative Evaluation
 Not
enough data
 Not
enough of the right kind of
data
 Using
convenience samples to
draw firm conclusions
Process Evaluation
Colonel Brighton: “And
what are you to do for the
Arab Bureau?”
Lawrence: “I’m to
appreciate the situation.”
What is Process
Evaluation?

An extension of formative evaluation

A prelude and companion to outcome
evaluation

Concerned with monitoring and
collecting data on the fidelity and
implementation of campaign activities
Why Conduct Process
Evaluation?
 Detecting
small problems
before they become large
*Is the social marketing
program on track?
*Are midcourse course
corrections necessary?
Why Conduct Process
Evaluation (cont.)?
 Providing
immediate
evidence that the system is
working
*Are we keeping our
partners engaged?
*Do we need to boost
morale?
Why Conduct Process
Evaluation (cont.)?
 Helping
with the interpretation
of other evaluation results
*What context have we
provided for further
assessment?
*What have we learned to
help us understand successes
and disappointments?
Delivery/Implementation
Evaluation
Delivery/Implementation
Evaluation
Delivery/Implementation
Evaluation

Key Questions
*Is an effective system in place for
communicating a message?
*Are activities being carried out as
planned?
*Is the timetable being followed?
*Are the project staff, partners, and
volunteers doing their jobs as
assigned?
Delivery/Implementation
Evaluation (cont.)

Problems that
delivery/implementation evaluation
can uncover
*Shortage of resources
*Lack of motivation
*Poor leadership
*Confusion about the
implementation plan
*Intervening events
Methods of Evaluating
Delivery/Implementation
Log/tracking
Systematic
systems
checks with
implementers, partners,
and media
Exposure/Reach
Evaluation

Key questions
*Was the message received as
intended?
*How many people heard and/or
saw the message?
*Did the primary and secondary
target audiences hear and/or see
the message?
Exposure/Reach
Evaluation (cont.)
 Problems
that exposure/reach
evaluation can uncover
*Lack of appropriate
assessment of
delivery/implementation
*Intervening events
*Poor planning
Methods of Evaluating
Exposure/Reach
 Monitoring
mass media
*Monitoring services
*Content analysis
 Materials
inventory
*Checking stock
*Checking distribution points
Methods of Evaluating
Exposure/Reach (cont.)

Monitoring responses and inquiries
*Calls to telephone hotlines
*Written requests for materials
*Web site hits and inquiries

Surveys
*Exposure to campaigns
*Awareness of campaigns
Limitations of Process
Evaluation
 Data
can be misleading
 Doesn’t
tell you how
people reacted to a
message
Outcome Evaluation
Purpose of Outcome
Evaluation
Is there evidence that our
intervention worked?
 We need to know for ourselves if
the effort was worth it
 Partners and funders will expect
signs of success
 We need to know how to build on
success (or avoid repeating
failures)

Grounding Outcome
Evaluation
in Objectives

Outcome evaluation should be
guided by objectives that have
been refined from the early stages
of planning

Objectives should be SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Achievable,
Realistic, and Time-phased)
Examples of SMART
Objectives
 Belief
Objective– “By
September 2017, increase by
20% the number of middle
school students in Barnstable
County who believe they are
capable of using resistance
strategies against drinking at
appropriate moments.”
Examples of SMART
Objectives
 Knowledge
Objective– “By
September 2017, increase by
30% the number of middle
school students in Barnstable
County who know at least
three resistance strategies that
can be used when pressured
to drink alcohol.”
Examples of SMART
Objectives
 Behavioral
Objective– “By
September 2017, increase by
10% the number of middle
school students in Barnstable
County who consistently use
resistance strategies when
pressured to use alcohol.”
Classic Experiment: Gold
Standard for Outcome
Evaluation
Experimental Group*
Pretest  Intervention  Posttest
Control Group*
Pretest  No Intervention**  Posttest
*Assumes random assignment (considered
quasi-experimental if random assignment
doesn’t exist)
**Or at least a modified version of the
intervention
Not Meeting the Gold Standard:
Random Assignment Not Possible
 Random
assignment might not
be possible for logistical
reasons
 Try
to match to a control group
that is similar to the
experimental group
Not Meeting the Gold Standard:
Comparison Group Not Possible

Using a comparison group might be
cost prohibitive or logistically
impossible due to access

A time series design is still very
rigorous, but requires several data
collections
PRPRPRTRPOPOPO
Not Meeting the Gold Standard:
Pretest Is Not Possible

Intervention might be underway
before there is time to collect baseline
data or the team can’t afford a
pretest

Can do a posttest only control group
design, but you’ll never know if groups
were equivalent at the beginning

Might be possible to use secondary
data as a baseline
Not Meeting the Gold Standard:
Can’t Afford to Collect Any Data

Is there a partner that can collect
data for you?

With increased access to databases
online, look for secondary data
sources (might have to wait some
time for identifying change)

Are there reasonable proxy measures
to use?