GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Strengthening the Evaluation Design and the Validity of the Conclusions

Strengthening the Evaluation Design and the Validity of the Conclusions

Library
M Bamberger et al
2006

Summary

How can threats to the validity of evaluations be identified and addressed? This chapter from Realworld Evaluation: Working Under Budget, Time, Data and Political Constraints outlines some of the most common threats to the validity of both quantitative (QUANT) and qualitative (QUAL) evaluation designs. It offers recommendations on how and when corrective measures can be taken to protect validity.

The concept of validity is closely related to that of accuracy: actual conditions must be represented in the evaluation data. In QUANT methodology, the accuracy of the data is referred to as internal validity or reliability, and in QUAL methodology, as descriptive validity or credibility. The validity of evaluation findings based on data are referred to as interpretive or evaluative validity (QUAL) and their applicability beyond the site context as generalisability (QUAL) and external validity (QUANT). The validity of an evaluation is affected by: (a) the appropriateness of the evaluation focus, approach and methods; (b) the availability of data; (c) how well the data support valid findings; and (d) the adequacy of the evaluation team to collect, analyse, and interpret data.

Evaluation designs can be assessed for potential threats to the validity of conclusions. Steps can then be taken to strengthen the likelihood of adequate and appropriate data collection and of valid evaluation findings. The Integrated Checklist for assessing evaluation validity, which includes more specific information, may be helpful.

To assess and strengthen QUAL evaluation designs:

  • consider the comprehensiveness of data sources
  • consider the cultural competence of data collectors
  • consider the adequacy of ongoing and overall data analysis techniques and team capacity.

To assess and strengthen QUANT evaluation designs:

  • consider whether random sample selection is appropriate and, if so, whether there is sufficient sample size or any potential sampling bias
  • consider whether key indicators have been appropriately identified and whether measures or estimates of them are likely to be accurate
  • consider whether statistical procedures have been appropriately selected and whether there is sufficient expertise for their use.

To assess and strengthen all evaluation designs:

  • consider and use, as available, triangulation, validation, meta-evaluation and peer review
  • consider the likelihood that a thoughtful combination of QUAL and QUANT approaches in a mixed-method design would improve the comprehensiveness of data and validity of findings
  • consider the attitudes of policymakers and how they may affect data access and utilisation.

Source

Bamberger, M., Rugh, J., and Mabry, L., 2006, 'Strengthening the Evaluation Design and the Validity of the Conclusions' Chapter 7 in Realworld Evaluation: Working Under Budget, Time, Data and Political Constraints, Sage Publications, California

Related Content

Lessons from stabilisation, statebuilding, and development programming in South Sudan
Helpdesk Report
2020
Doing research in fragile contexts
Literature Review
2019
Designing, Implementing and Evaluating Public Works Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2018
Indicators and Methods for Assessing Entrepreneurship Training Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2018

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".