Involving Stakeholders in the Evaluation of Community Alcohol Projects: Finding a Balance Between Subjective Insight and Objective Facts

References

• Argyris C., Schon D. A. Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA 1996
   Google Scholar
• Boots K., Cutmore T., Midford R., Harrison D., Laughlin D. COMPARI Project evaluation report. National Centre for Research into the Prevention of Drug Abuse, Perth 1995
   Google Scholar
• Bradley J. E., Mayfield M. V., Mehta M. P., Rukonge A. Participatory evaluation of reproductive health care quality in developing countries. Social Science & Medicine 2002; 55: 269–282
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandon P. R. Stakeholder participation for the purpose of helping ensure evaluation validity: Bridging the gap between collaborative and non-collaborative evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation 1998; 19(3)325–337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artificial neural networks and complex social systems. III. Applications. Substance Use & Misuse 1998; 33: 553–916, Buscema, M.(eds)
   Google Scholar
• Casswell S. A decade of community action research. Kettil Bruun Society Thematic Meeting: Fourth Symposium on Community Action Research and the Prevention of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems, Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit, S. Casswell, H. Holder, M. Holmila, S. Larsson, R. Midford, H. Moewaka Barnes, et al. University of Auckland, Auckland 1999; 30–48
   Google Scholar
• Christie C. A. What guides evaluation? A study of how evaluation practice maps onto evaluation theory. New Directions for Evaluation 2003; 97: 7–35
   Google Scholar
• Christie C. A., Alkin M. C. The user-oriented evaluator's role in formulating a program theory: Using a theory-driven approach. American Journal of Evaluation 2003; 24(3)373–385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwall A. Participatory research methods: First steps in a participatory process. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 94–129
   Google Scholar
• Participatory evaluation in education: Studies in evaluation use and organisational learning, J. B. Cousins, L. M. Earl. Falmer, Washington, DC 1995
   Google Scholar
• deKoning K., Martin M. Participatory research in health: Setting the context. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 1–18
   Google Scholar
• Dick B. Action research and evaluation. 1998, www.aifs.gov.au/sf/actionresearch.html Retrieved January 12, 2004, from
   Google Scholar
• English B. Conducting ethical evaluation with disadvantaged and minority target groups. Evaluation Practice 1997; 18(1)49–54
   Google Scholar
• Fetterman D. Empowerment evaluation: A response to Patton and Scriven. Evaluation Practice 1997; 18(3)253–266
   Google Scholar
• Fetterman D. M. Empowerment evaluation: Building communities of practice and a culture of learning. American Journal of Community Psychology 2002; 30(1)89–102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freire P. Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin, Middlesex 1972
   Google Scholar
• Friedman V. J. Designed blindness: An action science perspective on program theory evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 2001; 22(2)161–181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. New directions for evaluation, J. Greene, V. Caracelli. Jossey Bass, San Francisco 1997
   Google Scholar
• Guba E. G., Lincoln Y. S. Effective evaluation. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1981
   Google Scholar
• Hall J. E. Pluralistic evaluation: A situational approach to service evaluation. Journal of Nursing Management 2004; 12: 22–27
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harpham T., Few R. The Dar Es Salaam Urban Health Project, Tanzania: A multi-dimensional evaluation. Journal of Public Health Medicine 2002; 24(2)112–119
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hart E. The use of pluralistic evaluation to explore people's experiences of stroke services in the community. Health and Social Science in the Community 1999; 7(4)248–256
   Google Scholar
• Henry G. T. Book review: Transparency, stakeholder involvement, and explanation in contemporary evaluation: A review essay stimulated by “Success in early intervention: The Chicago child-parent centres” edited by Arthur J. Reynolds. American Journal of Evaluation 2002; 23(2)235–244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrenz F., Huffman D. The Archipelago approach to mixed method evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 2002; 23(3)331–338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrenz F., Huffman D. How can multi-site evaluations be participatory. American Journal of Evaluation 2003; 24(4)471–482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrenz F., Keiser N., Lavoie B. Evaluative site visits: A methodological review. American Journal of Evaluation 2003; 24(3)341–352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire P. Proposing a more feminist participatory research: Knowing and being embraced openly. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 27–39
   Google Scholar
• Martin M. Issues of power in the participatory research process. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 82–93
   Google Scholar
• Mathison S. What's it like when the participatory evaluator is a “genuine” stakeholder?. American Journal of Evaluation 2001; 22(1)29–35
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier C. Participation in a stakeholder-based evaluation: A case study. Evaluation and Program Planning 1997; 20(4)467–475
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mertens D. M. Inclusive evaluation: Implications of transformative theory for evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 1999; 20(1)1–14
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Midford R. Submission to the Alcohol Education and Rehabilitation Foundation. National Drug Research Institute, Perth 2003
   Google Scholar
• Okurut S., Odong A., Imalingat J., Okurut A., Oloit L., Oloit F. Participartory research processes and empowerment: The PACODET community, Uganda. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 72–81
   Google Scholar
• Ovretveit J. Evaluating health intervention. Open University Press, Maidenhead 1998
   Google Scholar
• Ovretveit J. Producing useful research about quality improvement. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 2002; 15(6/7)294–302
   Google Scholar
• Patton M. Q. Qualitative methods in health care evaluation. Health care evaluation—The report of the National Health Care Evaluation Workshop. Public Health Association of Australia (Pub), Canberra 1989; 26–40
   Google Scholar
• Patton M. Q. Of vacuum cleaners and toolboxes: A response to Fetterman's response. Evaluation Practice 1997a; 18(3)267–270
   Google Scholar
• Patton M. Q. Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice 1997b; 18(2)147–163
   Google Scholar
• Patton M. Q. Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 1997c
   Google Scholar
• Rossi P. H., Freeman H. E., Lipsey M. W. Evaluation: A systematic approach. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 1999
   Google Scholar
• Rothman J. Action evaluation: A new method of goal setting, planning and defining success for community development initiatives, http://www.abrasco.org.br/GT%20Promocao/Action%20Evaluation.pdf(n.d.). Retrieved July 11, 2004, from
   Google Scholar
• Scriven M. Empowerment evaluation examined. Evaluation Practice 1997; 18(2)165–175
   Google Scholar
• Secret M., Jordan A., Ford J. Empowerment evaluation as a social work strategy. Health & Social Work 1999; 24(2)120–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiner M., Thom B., MacGregor S., Gordon D., Bayley M. Exploring community responses to drugs. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York, UK 2004, http://www.jrf.org.uk/bookshop/eBooks/1859352685.pdf Retrieved July 19, 2006, from
   Google Scholar
• Smith G., Cantley C. Assessing health care: A study in organisational evaluation. Open University Press, Milton Keynes 1985
   Google Scholar
• Smith M. F. Participatory evaluation: Not working or not tested. American Journal of Evaluation 1999; 20(2)295–30
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stake R. E. Stakeholder influence in the evaluation of cities-in-schools. Stakeholder-based evaluation, A. S. Bryk. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1983; Vol. 17: 15–30
   Google Scholar
• Stufflebeam D. L. Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation 2001; 89: 7–98
   Google Scholar
• Sulkunen P., Maatta M., Rantala K. Translating back—Evaluation as sociological intervention. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 2003; 20: 161–168, (Suppl.)
   Google Scholar
• Tandon R. An historical perspective to PR. Participatory research in health: Issues and experiences, K. deKoning, M. Martin. National Progressive Primary Health Care Network, Johannesburg 1996; 19–26
   Google Scholar
• VanVlaenderen H. Evaluating development programs: Building joint activity. Evaluation and Program Planning 2001; 24: 343–352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wadsworth Y. Everyday evaluation on the run. Action Research Issues Association, Melbourne 1991
   Google Scholar
• Weiss C. H. The stakeholder approach to evaluation: Origins and promise. Stakeholder-based evaluation, A. S. Bryk. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1983a; Vol. 17: 3–14
   Google Scholar
• Weiss C. H. Toward the future of stakeholder approaches in evaluation. Stakeholder-based evaluation, A. S. Bryk. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1983b; Vol. 17: 83–96
   Google Scholar
• Weiss C. H. Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation?. American Journal of Evaluation 1998; 19(1)21–33
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar