Performance Evaluation: Proven Approaches for Improving Program and Organizational Performance (review)

Performance Evaluation is a new entry into a crowded market for books on program evaluation. Given all of the choices, it seems fair to ask what Ingrid Guerra-López’s book offers that is new, different, or better. My answer to the question is guided by one main question: Would the book make sense to the students in a course I teach on program evaluation in higher education and help them to learn how to do basic program evaluations? I have used several different books in a so-far-unsuccessful attempt to find one that communicates the essentials of evaluation in a straightforward and understandable way to me and to them; doesn’t confuse them completely with its idiosyncratic approach, terms, and methods; and is affordable. Thus, it was with some sense of hope that I read Performance Evaluation.

On its surface, Performance Evaluation is like most evaluation texts. It covers the standard topics: foundations of program evaluation, models, methods of data collection, and analysis, standards for measuring evaluations, and how to communicate results. In Part 1, Guerra-López lays out her conceptualization of evaluation as a means to an end: societal as well as program performance improvement. She ultimately sees evaluation as determining whether programs “delivered the desired results, whether these results are worth having in the first place, and whether the benefits of the results outweigh their costs and unintended consequences” (p. 6).

Evaluation activities then are concerned with gathering data about results, comparing those results with intended outcome and using the information to improve performance at all levels from the societal role of the organization down to the functioning of a specific program.

In Part 2, Guerra-López provides a brief overview of classic evaluation models and then describes in some depth less common evaluation models that are in some way related to her own thinking: Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels, Phillip’s Return on Investment model (cost-benefit analysis), Brinkerhof’s Success Case Model, Stufflebeam’s CIPP model, and her own Impact Evaluation Process. For each, she describes the model, provides an illustration of the model’s application, and identifies the model’s strengths and weaknesses. The descriptions provide an introduction to, but not a thorough exposition of, each model. She cautions readers that borrowing from various models may be best.

Part 3 deals with data, data collection, and analysis. Part 4, “Continual Improvement,” contains chapters on an assortment of topics from common errors in evaluation, to continuous improvement, to contracting with evaluators, and, finally, intelligence gathering.

Performance Evaluation has several strengths. First, as institutions of higher education are called upon to engage in outcomes assessment, conceptions of program evaluation as proposed by Guerra-López that emphasize performance improvement are very useful. They see evaluation, not as an episodic event done to an organization or even for it, but rather as an integral part of effective organizational activity.

Another strength is that the book is targeted at a more general audience than many evaluation texts. Unlike Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen (2004), for example, the Guerra-López text is not written for professional evaluators. On key topics, the level of depth and difficulty is just right for novice evaluators. In particular, her descriptions of the models of evaluation provide key points about the models but are not belabored. The chapters in Part 3, “Tools and Techniques of Evaluation,” are generally clear, well written, and easily accessible. Especially helpful for students is the description of measurable indicators, what they are, when one needs to use them, and where one finds them. Sophisticated researchers will likely find these chapters too simple, but for the novice evaluator/researcher, the level of difficulty is perfect.

As with any evaluation text, the book has its limitations. I will highlight several of those of most concern. First, Guerra-López’s discussion of the historical and conceptual underpinnings of performance evaluation and improvement seems limited and...