Program Evaluation: Strengths and Limitations

Program Evaluation: Strengths and Limitations

Program Evaluation: Strengths and Limitations

Permalink:

In most parts of the world today, food shortage has been a major issue of concern and our state is no exceptional.

This program is aimed at curbing food insecurity and reduce its impact on the community.

The organization saw it as a good idea and came up with the community based program ‘kick out food insecurity’.

The program has been in existence since the winter of 2015.

Cont.introduction

This initiative is mainly based on making food more accessible to the low income earners in this state of ours.

The food was mainly distributed and accessible through community based organizations .

The low income earners were also be provided with tokens which will enable the access food at cheaper and affordable rates.

These tokens were mainly to give them access fresh vegetables and fruits which might not be provided by the organizations.

Type of program

The identified type of program evaluation was the Summative.

It provides information on program effectiveness.

It is conducted after the completion of the program design

Stakeholders

Major stakeholders such as the MOANR and MOF were interested in knowing the efficiency of the program.

They are also eager on how the program is flexible for expansion.

However, for them to come into such a conclusion, they had to look and scrutinize the financial inputs and efficiency of the program.

By fully evaluating the program, there was at least chances of discovering the potential areas for expansion, problems likely to arise and expansion of the program to other states facing the same menace.

*

Strengths and limitations

Just like any other program, this one also had its strengths and limitations.

However, the good thing with the program is that the strengths overweighed the limitations.

They were divided into three categories: integrity, reliability and validity

Cont. strengths and limitations

Strengths

Integrity-the program was carried with outmost integrity which prevented loss of money and food stuff landing into the wrong hands.

Reliability-according to the beneficiaries, the program was reliable.

Validity-in general, more than ¾ of the benefactors were contended and hence proving the validity of the program.

Limitations

Integrity-due to too much integrity, many needy people were left out of the program.

Reliability-in some regions the program was not properly functioning hence causing inconveniences to needy people there.

Validity-in some areas, most people saw it as a scum and hence were adamant to the program.

Analysis of strengths and limitations

The strengths really played a major role in the success of the program.

There was also a need to find a way on how to improve on the limitations.

If some of the mistakes which brought about the limitations were to be avoided, then the program would be even suitable for any area facing this challenge of food insecurity.

conclusion

From the way the program has been conducted so far, it has helped more people than it was thought it would.

A little adjustments needs to be done so that the program can avoid the little drawbacks it is facing.

With that, the program can even be spread to other parts of the world.

References

“Basic Guide To Program Evaluation (Including Many Additional Resources)”.Managementhelp.org. N.p., 2017. Web. 16 June 2017.

Bamberger, Michael, Jim Rugh, and Linda Mabry. Realworld Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif. [u.a.]: Sage, 2007. Print.

Royse, David D, Bruce A Thyer, and John F Padgett. Program Evaluation. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2010. Print.

Harvey, John, Eleanor Chelimsky, and William R Shadish. Yksinäisiä Sydämiä. Keuruu: Otavan Kirapaino Oy, 2008. Print.

*

*