Reports

The reports are a result of the evaluation. The evaluation must ensure the following:

• Applicants interested representatives and other recipients of the reports should be provided with sufficient information about the development and impact of the programme.
• Applicants and interested agents use the reports to comprehensively understand programme development, its value, and related decisions.

When preparing the reports, it should be borne in mind that the applicants and administrators of the programme usually do not like long reports. Above all, they are looking for reports that make it easy to find the information they need to make decisions quickly.

That does not mean that information is missing. Reports should also include the technical aspects of the evaluation process. In any case, the type of content and the type of distribution depend on the type of recipient. In short, a balance between the content, scope and interest of the recipient is the ultimate goal.

It should be noted that reports are also a means of achieving transparency in the evaluation process, which of course underlines its reliability and usefulness.

While there are many general rules on how to draft reports, we would like to propose a full evaluation report here.

General characteristics:

• Write a maximum of 30 to 50 pages (with separate attachments). The technical appendices have little operational value and can be omitted in short reports.
• Add a short summary at the beginning (maximum 1 page).
• Also include a summary of key findings and recommendations (maximum 4 pages).
• programme description.
• Description of the evaluation procedure.
• Details of the analyses and instruments may be attached to the annexes.

To the sections:

• Introductory and executive summary
• Description of the program: objectives, resources, implementation process, results and conclusions of some previous evaluations.
• Description of the evaluation: objectives and key issues; design; indicators, variables and instruments; to process; and results.
• Conclusions and recommendations.

Communication strategies

In general, multiple strategies and resources are often used to disseminate the results of the evaluation, which means that several reports are written. In this respect, the nature of the means of communication largely depends on the recipient. More generally, you must consider at least three possible audiences: (1) technicians and administrators, (2) policy makers and managers, and (3) professionals.

A specific communication plan will be drawn up for each of these groups, containing the means to be used (reports, conferences, articles in journals, work tables, etc.) and a distribution calendar.

Reports are usually presented open to interested audiences. Therefore, at least one event will be conducted for the submission, presentation or publication of each report. This adds transparency to the process in addition to the advertising effect.

After all, a very interesting topic is related to the resources to be disseminated. The role of current globalisation, the potential of new technologies and the impact of social networks and the number of possible resources has increased exponentially in recent years and need to be taken into account. Some of the possible resources are the following:

• short presentations.
• Information notes that summarize the conclusions and recommendations. You can use the newsletter format, which has been published both physically and digitally.
• Blogs explaining the process, outcomes, conclusions, etc.
• Detailed paper reports with all aspects of the evaluation provided to the host institution.
• Press Releases.
• Scientific articles for journals.
• Brief sub-reports with various specific aspects of the evaluation

Ethical issues

In summary, the most important ethical norms for the persons to be evaluated are:

• Do not cause any damage to persons! This is the main risk in the development of the evaluation. Harm as a physical condition (wounds, pain, discomfort, etc.) as a mental condition (anxiety, malaise, stress, anxiety, etc.) as a social condition (bad social image, confrontation with equals, etc.) as economic or any Kind of understood different kind.
• Do not exclude individuals from interventions known to be of benefit. This means that the rating should not prevent a user from benefiting from a programme if it has proved useful.
• The allocation to comparison groups – not according to evaluation criteria – should be implemented at the beginning of the programme. It is a requirement for the planning of the evaluation. The evaluators could be tempted to change the selection criteria for the participants or to make the selection and assignment according to non-methodological criteria.
• Efficient management and protection of private and personal information.

Another important ethical dimension focuses on the issues of transparency, i. to all persons who would like to know how an evaluation was carried out. For this, the evaluation must meet the following criteria: announced, impartial and reproducible.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.