Evaluation in the context of human services and social work the systematic assessment of determining a programmes worth, merit or value. It is more

Evaluation in the context of human services and social work the systematic assessment of determining a programmes worth, merit or value. It is more than analysing information and data, and includes how programmes are implemented and carried out, and whether and how a programme is accomplishing its objectives (Mertens and Wilson, 2013).

Evaluation and research can be challenging to differentiate. This can be because evaluation is known as a form of research and research methods are used to conduct the evaluative process. However, both have a different purpose. Evaluation is thought to be focused on producing specific, applied knowledge and is a more practical form of research. Whereas research is thought to be interested in producing generalisable knowledge, to be more theoretical, and academic in nature. Moreover, research outcomes can commonly be utilised in a variety of settings and contexts, in contrast to outcomes from evaluations being only relevant to a specific programme or policy (Sanders et al, 2017). Further, another difference is that the participants involved in conducting research can be chosen more broadly than those in the evaluative process, who instead must be part of the program being evaluated (Sukovic, 2018).

Evaluation is significant in the human services field for varied reasons. One of the most common is the purpose of obtaining funding to continue running the programmes (REF). Government schemes need to justify why they will give funding to one program as opposed to another with the same objectives. Evaluations can provide evidence to support these decisions by demonstrating good resource management and prior successes and achievements in other programs. This aspect also holds an organisation to accountability that public money is justified and being put to good use (Wadsworth, 2011). Further, a key reason for evaluation is to have a focus on the voice, experiences and concerns of the consumer (Wadsworth, 2011). This aspect of the process holds social workers to accountability listed in their code of ethics and values (AASW, 2020), and can prevent complacency in practice (Cree et al, 2019). As such, another factor for evaluation is looking for methods to assist our clients more proficiently. As highlighted in, Hoggarth and Comfort (2010), social workers have a goal to improve the lives of their clients. As the evaluative process helps identify what services are both effective and ineffective, this can reduce some of the potential resistance felt toward the evaluative process (REF).

Negative attitudes and resistance towards evaluation is highlighted as a key tension in the process (Robinson, 2013). Some practitioners and experts in the area of human services are apprehensive that emphasising measurement, and evaluation may disruptproviding quality services.

Increasingly, programmes andservice delivery must be supported by evidence-based practise. The impact of neoliberal reforms, which have led to a restructuring in the provision of welfare services, is a prominent source of tension related toevaluation processes. As such, audit culture has emerged, whereby if a programme is not measurable, is seen as ineffective (Shore and Wright, 2015). This can present difficulties for practitioners as they attempt to support clients, while also fulfilling the conditions of evaluative and measurement processes.

It is debated however, which types of evaluations offer the best evidence because various types of evaluations use differentmethods. Many, evaluations attempt to demonstrate that the programme led to the desired outcomes, proving its effectiveness. It is crucial to keep in mind that various types of methods enable for the drawing of stronger or weaker conclusions about a program's effectiveness.It is claimed that there is a "hierarchy" or ranking of what is regarded as "best evidence" when attempting to determine whether a programme produces certain outcomes (Hariton & Locascio, 2018).

Wadsworth, Y. (2011).Everyday evaluation on the run: The user-friendly introductory guide to effective evaluation. Taylor & Francis Group.

Hoggarth, L., & Comfort, H. (2010).A practical guide to outcome evaluation. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Cree, V., Jain, S., & Hillen, D. P. (2019). Evaluating effectiveness in social work: sharing dilemmas in practice. European Journal of Social Work, 22(4), 599610. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2018.1441136Mertens, D., & Wilson, A. (2013).Program evaluation theory and practice: A comprehensive guide.Guilford Press.

Sukovic, S. (2018). Evaluation and Research - Part 2: Similarities and Differences. http://blog.heti.nsw.gov.au/2017/10/25/evaluation-research-part-2-similarities-differencesSanders, J., Brown, J., & Walsh, K. (2017). Research or evaluation - does the difference matter? Education for Primary Care, 28(3), 134-136.https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2017.1305873Links to an external site.

Robinson, E. (2013). The nuts and bolts of program evaluation [Webinar]. Australian Institute of Family Studies. https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/webinars/nuts-and-bolts-program-evaluationStewart, J. (2014). Developing a Culture of Evaluation and Research. CFCA Paper 28. Canberra: Australian Institute of Family Studies. https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/developing-culture-evaluation-and-researchLinks to an external site.