An Evaluation of the UfI/learndirect Telephone Guidance Trial (2007)

Submitted by nsennhauser on 5 February, 2009 - 01:00
An Evaluation of the UfI/learndirect Telephone Guidance Trial (2007)
Documents
Appraisal Main Report: 
application/pdf iconUK23_T3_Appraisal_Report.pdf
Appraisal Characteristics
Who conducted the appraisal ?: 
-- No selected --
Timing of the appraisal: 
Accompanying (during the implementation of the policy measure, multiple points in time)
Purpose of the appraisal: 
Summative ("judgemental")
Topics covered in the appraisal (Questions that the appraisal aims to answer)
External Consistency (If the measure's goals were appropriate and consistent with the external challenges the measure was meant : 
No
Internal Consistency (If the measure's modalities were appropriate and consistent with its goals): 
Yes
Coherence/Complementarity (Whether the measure was coherent with, and complementary to, other programmes and policy initiatives): 
Yes
Goal Attainment/Effectiveness (If the goals of the measure were achieved): 
Yes
Outputs, Outcomes and Impacts (The consequences or results of the measure): 
Yes
Quality of Outputs (Whether the outputs of projects were of a high quality): 
Yes
Value for Money/Return on Investment/Cost-Benefit Efficiency (If there were adequate returns on investment): 
Yes
Programme Implementation Efficiency (If the measure was well-managed): 
No
Project Implementation Efficiency (If projects supported by the measure were well-managed): 
No
Input Additionality (If the measure stimulated more investment in innovation than would have occurred in the absence of the meas: 
No
Output Additionality (If the measure stimulated more innovation outputs than would have occurred in the absence of the measure): 
No
Behavioural Additionality (If the measure stimulated persistent changes in the behaviours of the participants that would have no: 
No
Policy/Strategy Development (Implications for future strategy development and policy formulation): 
Yes
Gender issues: 
Yes
Minority issues: 
Yes
Did the appraisal look at the following inpacts?
Scientific: 
No
Technological: 
No
Economic: 
Yes, but only impact on the participants
Environmental: 
No
Sponsor(s) of the appraisal
Programme Owner/Manager: 
Yes
Other Government Department: 
No
Oher Public Bodies (e.g. court of auditors, parliament committee): 
No
Data analysis method employed in the appraisal
Case Study Analysis: 
Employed
Network Analysys: 
Not Employed
Econometric Analysis: 
Not Employed
Descriptive Statistics (e.g. updake analysis): 
Employed
Input/Output Analysis: 
Employed
Document Analysis: 
Not Employed
Context Analysis: 
Not Employed
Before/After Group Comparison Approach: 
Not Employed
Control Group Approach: 
Not Employed
Counter-Factual Approach: 
Not Employed
Cost/Benefit Approach: 
Employed
Data collection methods and data sources employed in the appraisal
Existing Surveys/Databases: 
Employed
Participant Surveys: 
Employed
Non-participant Surveys: 
Not Employed
Interviews: 
Employed
Focus Groups/Workshops/Meetings: 
Not Employed
Peer Reviews: 
Not Employed
Technometrics/Bibliometrics Search: 
Not Employed
Document Search: 
Employed
Monitor Data: 
Yes, but only impact on the participants
Main intended audiences for the appraisal
Policy Makers (Politicians): 
Yes
Policy Makers (Government Officials): 
Yes
Programme Management: 
Yes
Auditors/Financial Authorities: 
No
Those directly supported by the measure: 
No
External/International (co)sponsor of the measure/programme: 
No
Potential Users of the Measure: 
No
Policy Analysts: 
Yes
General Public: 
No
Quality of the Appraisal
Where the Terms of Reference available in the appraisal report?: 
Yes
  • 175 reads