impact evaluation – Heather E. Lanthorn

Oops, Got Long-Winded About ‘Median Impact Narratives’

*A revised version of this post is also available here. I finally got around to reading a post that had been flagged to me awhile ago, written by Bruce Wydick. While I don’t think the general idea of taking sampling and representatives seriously is a new one, the spin of a ‘median narrative’ may beContinue reading “Oops, Got Long-Winded About ‘Median Impact Narratives’”

What Does It Mean To Do Policy Relevant Evaluation?

A different version of this post appears here. For several months, I have intended to write a post about what it actually means to do research that is ‘policy relevant,’ as it seems to be a term that researchers can self-ascribe* to their work without stating clearly what this entails or if it is anContinue reading “What Does It Mean To Do Policy Relevant Evaluation?”

Pipeline Designs and Equipoise: How Can They Go Together?

I am writing about phase-in / pipeline designs. Again. I’ve already done it here. and more here. but. The premise of a pipeline or phase-in design is that groups will be randomized or otherwise experimentally allocated to receive a given intervention earlier or later. The ‘later’ group can then serve as the comparison for theContinue reading “Pipeline Designs and Equipoise: How Can They Go Together?”

Buffet of Champions: What Kind Do We Need for Impact Evaluations and Policy?

This post is also cross-posted here and here. I realize that the thesis of “we may need a new kind of champion” sounds like a rather anemic pitch for Guardians of the Galaxy. Moreover, it may lead to inflated hopes that i am going to propose that dance-offs be used more often to decide policyContinue reading “Buffet of Champions: What Kind Do We Need for Impact Evaluations and Policy?”

implementation / a ban on new ideas in India

not a lot of time to write on my own blog but here’s one that i wrote for 3ie based on the recent #3ievalconf in Delhi, Measuring Results.

back (and forward) from ‘the big push forward’ – thoughts on why evidence is political and what to do about it

i spent the beginning of the week in brighton at the ‘big push forward‘ conference, on the politics of evidence (#evpolitics) which mixed the need for venting and catharsis (about the “results agenda” and “results-based management” and “impact evaluation”) with some productive conversation, though no immediate concreteness on how the evidence from the conference would itself beContinue reading “back (and forward) from ‘the big push forward’ – thoughts on why evidence is political and what to do about it”