Evaluation of Public Policy Effectiveness - Essay Example

POLICY EFFECTIVESS Student’s name Code & Course Professor’s name University City Date Evaluation of Public Policy Effectiveness Introduction Public participation evaluation on policy making decisions can be based on either on the process or outcome. Process evaluation is focused more on the implementation of a program whereas outcome evaluation dwells more on the result; whether the intended results have been produced (Weiss, 1998:335). In determining the effectiveness of policies, outcome evaluation may not produce useful results as its only aim of assessing the intended results is often unclear. Process evaluations more often than not are used as substitutes for outcome evaluations justifiable that if the process is found to be effective, the outcome is more likely to be better. The main reason for evaluation is to ensure accountability. The evaluation seeks to establish the degree of fairness on the decision-making process and whether the views of the participants were represented in an accurate and fair manner. It is hereby that the aspect of liberalism comes into perspective. Many liberalists believe that in the public policy making of decisions, certain ideologies need to be put into place for them to be effective. The implemented ideologies need to integrate liberty and equality so that people can practice their rights of freedom. Liberalism is used as a tool to protect people from abuse of authority (Spicker, 2016). Its most important value is freedom. In the designing and implementation of public policies, the state is charged with the responsibility of prioritizing the human rights of the disadvantaged groups (Carmona, 2012). Social liberalism advocates for equity. Social liberalism practices economic liberalism but extends it in all life aspects excluding the political sphere. Liberalism, as much as it is based on personal choices to each and every one, it is of importance to respect the liberty and equality of others. It is not proper to force people as this goes against their natural right as free choosers. Liberalism proclaims economic and social inequality also the exclusion of discriminating habits. They have faith in the pleading of public policies so as to remove inequalities all the while still upholding civil rights and values. Public policy should be equal to everyone. Social liberalism states that all citizens have the right for active participation in the process. This freedom can only be guaranteed when the government ensures good education, health services and good welfare (Van de Haar, 2015). Liberalism mainly aims at social welfare programs that hope in accomplishing the sense of equality. Liberalism views the government as a necessary evil and a system, therefore, needs to be devised to give the government the necessary power that not only protects the individuals’ liberty but also a present abuse of power (Minogue, 2016). Keeping a track on the internal processes in government organizations and identifying how and when influence occurs is a great challenge. The time frame required to expect a public participation process in how it has affected the parties of interest in terms of knowledge, critical awareness of the subject and future participation is also a challenge. Measuring the effects of the process on the institutional and societal divide is quite time-consuming and may be difficult to separate from other processes that are crucial to the policy making process. The public policy decision-making process may be ran very well following particular criteria but this does not apply to all of them. Some of the decisions made may sit well with other people and not so well with others it all bubbles down to preferences and whether the decisions made have a positive or negative impact on them. At the end of it all, people in power have the final say. In the event that the public policy decision making is deemed positive or negative, only the one in power would have the opportunity to implement it. Involving the general public in the process is key as one would not be able to conclude that they would have arrived at that particular decision without the evolvement of the public. Experimental studies show that the decisions made reached by the public during the consultation show that it is more acceptable and appealing to majority of the people as compared to that decision that was reached upon based on the opinion of those commissioned implement the policies as they will only make the decisions based on their interests and wants. According to (Rosener, 1981) there are key elements that face the evaluation of public participation; absence of a well-laid out methodology for judging the success or failure rate of the evaluation process, absence of agreeable methods of evaluation, inadequacy of measurement tools that are reliable and the complex nature of the whole public participation concept. The perspectives of the key players such as policy makers, public, sponsors need to be taken into account to measure the success rate of process evaluation. The satisfaction of the participants will be used as a measure of success. Caution should, however, be taken in using participant satisfaction since it is based on their attitudes and opinions (Coglianese, 2002). It also suffers from a setback that excludes the non-participants. (Rowe and Frewer, 2004) advocate for the development of easy to use measurement tools. Their absence in the evaluation process needs to be looked into at the same time ensuring that they are valid and reliable. Evaluation of the Process This enables one to come to the conclusion that the program activities have been implemented. The feedback from the process evaluation strengthens the ability to give information on a given program and use the data gathered to improve on the oncoming activities. It not only enables one to track program information but also whoever it may be related to. Importance of Process Evaluation This helps give answers to the key questions in finding out how program activities are delivered. These questions include; who is in charge of delivering the program and how regular he does it? To what degree was the successful program implementation achieved as previously planned for? How the program is embraced by the group being targeted and the program staff? What are the factors hindering successful program delivery? Was the information used to make program improvements? If so, what changes are effected? Quality implementation ultimately means that the procedure used to go about this process complements the developmental, cultural and gender traits of the total number of people. During evaluation they receive technical support which enhances successful implementation of the policy (SAMHSA, 2015). They work hand in hand with the policy expert to understand the main component. Outcome Evaluation Approach It is used to measure the effects of the program in the aimed at population by finding out the progress in the outcomes that the program is supposed to look into (Myers and Barnes, 2005). This is for; allowance for good decision making, restructuring and improving the program, establishing a good evidence base, the offering of better and quality services and establishing a proof base and knowledge of what works. Short term outcomes give way to long-term outcomes. The information, figures, and percentages are viewed as proof working towards long-term outcomes. Disappointing occurrence evaluation results can often be shown by evaluating how the program was implemented and the number of customers served. The outcome evaluation in the absence of a process evaluation component will not provide data about why the program excelled or why it did not excel. Demerits of the Outcome Approach The methods used for evaluation many at times are not very precise and greatly depend on assumptions some of the things which are not proved. In some instances, it is hard to account for the outcomes of a program. It is very hard to tell the contribution from the government entity’s activity from that of the outside influence. Evaluation results may bear different impacts. Some of the facts are viewed in different perspectives according to the values of the various parties that are involved. It is extremely difficult to evaluate all sectors of a program with an absolute lack of prejudice. Conclusion Involving each and everyone in the public policy decision-making is key to its passing. It cuts out the sense of prejudice and bad motives by those people who do not have the best interest of everyone at heart. Public policy making should not be viewed as only an outcome but a process. If any of the two is overlooked, it cannot be truly successive. The processes are the ones that led to the outcome step by step and showed whether progress being made is positive or negative. Involvement of all people in public policy making is important in the sense that each and every one can give their views and perspective on the policy being implemented, in the long run at the end of it all the final decision that they come to is believed to be best and is more appealing to most of the people, and it favours all of them. However, it may consume a lot of time and resources that are already hard to find. It is also important to watch out for the disadvantages associated with the two evaluation methods. Using the outcome evaluation method is seen to be inadequate as it is more often than not difficult to distinguish whether the intended outcomes were as a result of governments influence or from the other external sources. The process evaluation method is more effective as it allows for data collection and analysis which can be used to improve on future activities. Reference List The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) 2015, Using Process Evaluation to Monitor Implementation. Spicker, P 2016, An Introduction to Social Policy, The Politics of Welfare Segrillo, 2012, ‘Liberalism, Marxism and Democratic Theory Revisited: Proposal of a Joint Index of Political and Economic Democracy’, In Brazilian Political Science Revie, Vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 8-27. Coglianese, C 2002, Is satisfaction success? Evaluating public participation in regulatory policymaking. John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Faculty Research Working Papers Series. Minogue, K, 2016, Liberalism Politics. Liberalism and Conservation Van de Haar, E 2015, Meaning of Liberalism Carmona, M, 2012, Final Draft of the Guiding Principles on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, submitted by the Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights. Human Rights Council Myers, P, and Barnes, J 2005, Measuring Outcomes. Guidance on Outcome Evaluation for sure start Local Programmes. Rosener, J 1981, ‘User-oriented evaluation: A new way to view citizen participation’, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, vol, 17, No. 4, pp. 583-596. Rowe, G, and Frewer, L 2004, ‘Evaluating public participation exercises: A research agenda’, Science Technology, and Human Values 2004, vol 29, no.4, pp 512-556. Weiss, C 1998, Evaluation. 2nd edition, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1998. Read More