Close
Close
Browser Compatibility Notification
It appears you are trying to access this site using an outdated browser. As a result, parts of the site may not function properly for you. We recommend updating your browser to its most recent version at your earliest convenience.
Home
I'd Like To...

greo logo

Contact Us Main menu icon
  • About Us
    • What We Do
    • Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Join Us
    View our Evidence Centre page
    Search the Evidence Centre
  • Services
    • Funding Opportunities
    • Applied Research
    • Knowledge Products 
    • Knowledge Management
    • Stakeholder Engagement
    • Impact Evaluation
    • Project Consulting
    View our Evidence Centre search page
    Search the Evidence Centre
  • Resources
    • Conceptual Framework of Harmful Gambling
    • Data Repository
    • Evidence Centre
    • Gambling from a Public Health Perspective
    • Prevention and Education Review: Gambling-Related Harm
    • Research to Inform Action Evidence Hub
    • Safer Gambling Evaluation Evidence Hub
    • Resources for Safer Gambling During COVID-19
    View our Evidence Centre search page
    Search the Evidence Centre
  • Partners
    • National Strategy to Reduce Gambling Harms in Great Britain
    • Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG)
    View our Evidence Centre page
    Search the Evidence Centre
  • Contact
    • Get in Touch
    • Helplines
    View our Evidence Centre page
    Search the Evidence Centre
  • Search
News:
Pause
  • Safer Gambling Evaluation Evidence Hub
    • About
    • Evaluation Tools and Resources
    • Get Involved
    • Evaluation Primer
    • Types of Evaluation
    • Evaluations during the COVID-19 Pandemic
    • Safer Gambling Evaluations
    • Safer Gambling Theories of Change
    • Evaluation Ethics
  • Conceptual Framework of Harmful Gambling
  • Data Repository
  • Evidence Centre
  • Gambling from a Public Health Perspective
  • Prevention and Education Review: Gambling-Related Harm
  • Research to Inform Action Evidence Hub
  • Resources for Safer Gambling During COVID-19

Types of Evaluation

Show or hide navigation More

More in this Section...

Decrease text size Default text size Increase text size
Print This Page
Share This Page
  • Open new window to share this page via Facebook Facebook
  • Open new window to share this page via LinkedIn LinkedIn
  • Open new window to share this page via Twitter Twitter
  • Email This page Email
Home/Resources/Safer Gambling Evaluation Evidence Hub/Types of Evaluation

Related Links

Contact Us

Orange key on silver keyboard.

There are two main types of traditional evaluations to evaluate safer gambling initiatives. Each type includes sub-types that serve different purposes. The purpose and goals of an evaluation start to become apparent when considering which type of evaluation to use. This is an important step in designing a meaningful evaluation.

Formative evaluations

Formative evaluations are performed early in the life cycle of a programme, near the beginning of its implementation. These types of evaluations focus on what is working and what is not working with the programme (and for whom), and what can be learned from its delivery to drive improvement. Formative evaluations aim to:

  • Improve the programme by examining its purpose and underlying programme theory.
  • Identify and monitor possible risks for implementation failure (when a programme is not implemented well) or theory failure (when an intervention is implemented as intended, but fails to have the desired impact because its underlying theory is flawed).
  • Understand the initiative and its implementation, considering contextual constraints.1

There are three sub-types of formative evaluations:2

  1. Needs assessments
  2. Evaluability assessments
  3. Process evaluations

Summative evaluations

Summative evaluations typically occur after a programme has been operating for some time to determine if it is achieving its intended outcomes/objectives.2,3 Although the focus of each sub-type of summative evaluation is slightly different, they both seek to make a judgement/determination about the value and success of a programme.

There are two sub-types of summative evaluations:3

  1. Economic evaluations
  2. Outcome evaluations
Types of evaluation chart

1 Mbuya, M. N., Jones, A. D., Ntozini, R., Humphrey, J. H., Moulton, L. H., Stoltzfus, R. J., Maluccio, J. A., & Sanitation Hygiene Infant Nutrition Efficacy (SHINE) Trial Team (2015). Theory-driven process evaluation of the SHINE trial using a program impact pathway approach. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 61 Suppl 7(Suppl 7), S752–S758. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ716

2 MacEachen, E. (2020). Formative Evaluations [MOOC lecture]. In E.MacEachen, Foundations of Program Evaluation. University of Waterloo.

3 Public Health England (2018). Guidance: Outcome evalution. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evaluation-in-health-and-well-being-overview/outcome-evaluation

 

Receive Email Updates...
×

© 2023 Greo

Suite 195, 3-304 Stone Road West
Guelph, ON, N1G 4W4
Tel: (519) 763-8049

Twitter icon

AccessibilityPrivacySitemapEvidence CentreContact UsBoard Login
Designed by eSolutions Group
  • About Us
    • What We Do
    • Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Join Us
  • Services
    • Funding Opportunities
    • Applied Research
    • Knowledge Products 
    • Knowledge Management
    • Stakeholder Engagement
    • Impact Evaluation
    • Project Consulting
  • Resources
    • Conceptual Framework of Harmful Gambling
    • Data Repository
    • Evidence Centre
    • Gambling from a Public Health Perspective
    • Prevention and Education Review: Gambling-Related Harm
    • Research to Inform Action Evidence Hub
    • Safer Gambling Evaluation Evidence Hub
    • Resources for Safer Gambling During COVID-19
  • Partners
    • National Strategy to Reduce Gambling Harms in Great Britain
    • Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG)
  • Contact
    • Get in Touch
    • Helplines