A Framework for Evaluating Systems Initiatives

• New programs or services developed within the system• Expanded individual program reach or coverage• Improved program quality• Increased program operational efficiency• Beneficiary outcomes that precede impactImpactsSystems initiatives focused on individual programs may be expected to demonstrate measurableimpacts for program participants. For example, a nutrition program would expect better health resultsfor participants. In contrast to evaluations of more comprehensive systems where impacts are expectedacross a broad array of domains, expected impacts here are specific to the program or interventionbeing evaluated.ExampleIn addition to its focus on context, The Build Initiative focuses on system components. Whileattempting to make improvements in the political environment that enable early childhooddevelopment systems to be built, Build states also work to improve the individual subsystems in them.This step is essential to ensuring that children and families have access to the comprehensive set ofprograms and services they need to be successful. For example, some states are working on enhancingtheir early and education subsystem by making high-quality preschool programs available for all threeandfour-year-olds. Others are concentrating on creating infant mental health programs and services.Still others are developing strategies to strengthen the quality of programs that currently exist. Whileall of the states have a broader system building vision and an accompanying strategy focused primarilyon political context, they take advantage of opportunities to advance the development of specificsubsystems and see this work as very much a part of their overall systems efforts.3ConnectionsSystems initiatives that concentrate on connections focus on what makes a system a system—theintegration, linkages, and alignment between its parts.ActivitiesInitiatives focused on this area attempt to connect subsystems or programs in meaningful ways. Onthe frontlines, those connections may include, for example, programs across or within subsystemsthat share professional development, staffing, facilities, technology and communication, datacollection, or funding. At the administrative level, such connections may include, for example, alignedeligibility requirements and enrollment processes, streamlined reporting procedures, coordinatedcase management, and established protocols and memoranda of understanding for referrals acrosssubsystems. These kinds of connections ensure that, when necessary, beneficiary needs identified inone subsystem can be referred to and managed by another.11A Framework for Evaluating Systems Initiatives