Local Evaluation of Children's Services Learning from the Children's ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ReferencesBecker, S. and Bryman, A. (eds) (2004) Understanding Research for Social Policyand Practice: Themes, Methods and Approaches, Bristol: The Policy Press.Clarke, A. (2001) ‘Research and the policy-making process’ in N. GilbertResearching Social Life (2 nd ed.), London: Sage.Coote, A., Allen, J., and Woodhead, D. (2004) Finding Out What Works:Understanding Complex, Community-Based Initiative, London: Kings Fund.Coulton, C., Connell, J., Kubisch, A., Schorr, L., and Weiss, C. (eds) (1995) NewApproaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concept, Methods and Contexts,New York: The Aspen Institute.Children and Young People’s Unit (CYPU, 2001) Children’s Fund Guidance, London:DfES.CYPU and Youth Justice Board (2002) Use of Children’s Fund Partnership Fundingfor Crime Prevention Activities Jointly Agreed with Youth Offending Teams:Guidance.Davies, H., Nutley, S., and Smith, P. (eds) (2000) What Works? Evidence-BasedPolicy and Practice in Public Services, Bristol: The Policy Press.Donaldson, S. & Scriven, M. (eds) (2003) Evaluating Social Programmes andProblems: Visions for the New Millennium, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Edwards, A., and Fox, C. (2005) ‘Using Activity Theory to evaluate a complexresponse to social exclusion’, Education & Child Psychology 21:1, pp50-60.Hardiker, P., Exton, K., and Barker, M. (1991) Policies and Practices in PreventiveChild Care, Aldershot: Ashgate.Mason, P. Morris, K., and Smith, P. (2005) ‘A complex solution to a complicatedproblem? Early messages from the national evaluation of the Children’s Fundpreventative programme'. Children & Society 19:2, pp131-143.McDonald, G. (2000) ‘Social Care: rhetoric and reality’ in Davies, H., Nutley, S., andSmith, P. (eds) What Works? Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services,Bristol: The Policy Press.Morris, K., and Spicer, N. (2003) The National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund:Early Messages for Developing Practice, London: DfES.National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund (NECF, 2004a) Assessing the Impact ofthe Children’s Fund: The Use of Indicators, Birmingham: University of Birmingham.National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund (NECF, 2004b) Collaborating for theSocial Inclusion of Children and Young People, London: Department for Educationand Skills.National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund (NECF, 2004c) Children, Young People,Parents and Carers’ Participation in Children’s Fund Case Study Partnerships,London: Department for Education and Skills.References 63
National Evaluation of the Children’s Fund (NECF, 2004d) Prevention and EarlyIntervention in the Social Inclusion of Children and Young People, London:Department for Education and Skills.Percy-Smith, J. (2000) Policy Responses to Social Exclusion: Towards Inclusion?Maidenhead: Open University Press.Pierson, J. (2002) Tackling Social Exclusion, London: Routledge.Solesbury, I. (2001) Evidence Based Policy: Whence it Came and Where it is Going,UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice Working Paper 1, London: ESRC.Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., and Dillon, L. (2004) Quality in QualitativeEvaluation: A Framework for Assessing Research Evidence, London: Cabinet Office.Young, K., Ashby, D., Boaz, A., and Grayson, L. (2002) ‘Social science and theevidence-based policy movement’, Social Policy & Society 1:3, pp215-24.64References
Page 1 and 2:
RESEARCHLocal Evaluation ofChildren
Page 4 and 5:
When citing this report please show
Page 6 and 7:
ContentsExecutive SummaryIIntroduct
Page 8 and 9:
Local Evaluation of the Children’
Page 10 and 11:
10. Local evaluators highlighted th
Page 12 and 13:
20. Some evaluators involved childr
Page 14 and 15:
successes of partnerships’ work (
Page 16:
38. Conditions reinforcing effectiv
Page 19 and 20:
Children’s Fund initiative, namel
Page 21 and 22:
engaging with policy makers, practi
Page 23 and 24:
starting points and timetables of d
Page 25 and 26:
1. Process evaluation: critical ass
Page 27 and 28:
time commitments and pressures amon
Page 29 and 30: tantamount to auditing when origina
Page 31 and 32: to a certain extent, because I was
Page 33 and 34: acknowledge that findings presented
Page 35 and 36: methods that were seen as being app
Page 38 and 39: Chapter 2: Methods Adopted by Child
Page 40 and 41: place. In one Wave One evaluation t
Page 42 and 43: provided by projects weakened the a
Page 44 and 45: confidently attribute any trends in
Page 46 and 47: A Wave Two evaluation report descri
Page 48 and 49: • Recruitment of the researcher:
Page 50 and 51: drawn on by evaluators include semi
Page 52 and 53: Chapter 3: How Local Evaluation Sup
Page 54 and 55: participation and work towards the
Page 56 and 57: highlighted in Table 1). These incl
Page 58 and 59: of had an impact. So we used a case
Page 60 and 61: Similarly an evaluator of a Wave Tw
Page 62 and 63: Evaluators sometimes struggled to a
Page 64: 6. A number of factors inhibit eval
Page 67 and 68: A number of evaluations described h
Page 69 and 70: 4.2 Key Messages from Local Evaluat
Page 71 and 72: for staff, typically dedicated part
Page 73 and 74: Where partnership working was descr
Page 75 and 76: strategic changes in children’s s
Page 77 and 78: 9. Evaluators reported that some co
Page 79: The importance of providing finding
show all

Local Evaluation of Children's Services Learning from the Children's ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?