Evidencing Outcomes
Ruth Mann / George Box
Commissioning Strategies Group, NOMS
February 2014
UNCLASSIFIED
Have you made an impact?
•
What does your project/service/intervention set out to achieve?
•
How can you demonstrate that it has achieved this outcome?
•
In order to demonstrate that your outcomes are valid and your
project/service/intervention has an impact you will need to collect
evidence
Example
•
What sort of evidence would help establish whether a drug treatment
service had achieved its aim of reducing offending related to drug
misuse?
Intermediate outcomes
–
–
–
–
-
Fewer positive mandatory drug test results
Greater uptake of methadone replacement treatment
Greater attendance at Narcotics Anonymous meetings
Fewer assaults motivated by drug use
Results from a survey of drug users’ views of their likelihood of misusing drugs before
and after use of the service
Longer-term outcomes
–
Reduction in rates of drug-fuelled offending
What is evidence?
•
In order to demonstrate impact you can measure baseline indicators at
the start of your service/intervention and then compare the results to a
re-measurement of the baseline at least once (usually post)
•
It is important to identify objective indicators and have a good
understanding of how you are going to collect the evidence in the
planning stages of your intervention
•
Evidence can take a range of forms depending on your service and
outcome (surveys, observed behavioural change, interview data,
numeric data ect.)
How to collect evidence
•
Evidence gathering needs to be as simple and cost-effective as
possible
•
Ensure that the data you are collecting relates to the outcome you are
measuring
•
Pilot questionnaires and data collection methods.
•
Keep detailed records of the recording processes as you go along and
make changes if needed
Understanding and presenting evidence
•
The way in which you assess your outcomes will be dependent on your
method of data collection and the types of evidence you are collecting.
•
Judging the level of impact of an intervention can take multiple forms:
• Narrative accounts of a service/intervention
• Simple numeric data about, for example, the people who accessed the
service (descriptives)
• Case studies
• Evaluations
What is evaluation?
•
A type of research which aims to identify how well a
project/service/intervention achieves its aims
•
In CJ evaluations, the aim we are most often interested in is reducing
reoffending.
– Reconviction is most usual outcome
•
Intermediate outcomes are being established to use as proxy measures
for reconviction as well as legitimate outcomes in their own right
UNCLASSIFIED
For this grant, we are looking at evidence of
impact
•
Impact Evaluation
– An impact evaluation tries to identify whether or not a policy
achieved the outcome it set out to achieve.
– This requires identifying firstly whether the outcome was actually
achieved, and secondly whether the policy in question, rather than
one or more other factors, was responsible.
UNCLASSIFIED
NOMS standards for robust evidence
•
Randomised controlled trials
•
Statistical (e.g. meta-analysis) or narrative combination of two or more high
quality individual studies (i.e. studies that involved matched comparison groups
– see below)
•
Evaluation studies that compare the group receiving the intervention or service
with a matched comparison group (using propensity score matching or individual
matching techniques) of offenders who did not receive the service
•
Evaluation studies that demonstrate the value of the intervention or service by
comparing the actual reconviction rate against the predicted rate produced from
a high quality predictor such as Offenders Group Reconviction Scale (OGRS)
UNCLASSIFIED
What are the ingredients necessary for a robust
outcome evaluation?
•
A matched COMPARISON or CONTROL group
•
Large enough sample to detect a difference between groups
•
A well defined target group
•
Appropriate follow-up period
•
Statistical analysis
•
Peer review
UNCLASSIFIED
For this project we want to see
•
Systems put in place to gather relevant data systematically
•
Randomised control trials would be great, but unlikely. You would need to fund
them going beyond the life of the project. (for a 1 year reconviction rate you
would need at least 18 months of data after the intervention)
•
Other methods for collecting impact data, such as using the Ministry of Justice
Data Lab
•
Predicted vs. actual reconviction rate designs may also be possible
•
Impact on intermediate outcomes related to reoffending.
UNCLASSIFIED
Get some advice
•
You might want to have experts in evaluation involved in your project when
bidding to design and carry out an evaluation
•
Consider using the MoJ Data Lab
•
Advice on evaluations can be found on the MoJ website and gov.uk, and
includes - the Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team’s publication “Test,
Learn, Adapt”, the HM Treasury Magenta Book, the New Philanthropy Capital
(NPC) and Clinks joint project ‘Improving Your Evidence’, Project Oracle website
•
Plan your evaluation before you start the project so you know you are collecting
the right data from the start
•
Make sure you have a well thought through theory of change
UNCLASSIFIED
Example Intermediate Outcomes
Reoffending
factors
Indicators (examples of
behaviours indicating this
reoffending factor is present)
Desired Intermediate
Outcomes
Family /marital
relationships
Poor family relationships; no
current relationship, no
previous experience of close
relationships, manipulative or
aggressive in close
relationships
Reduced conflict in close
relationships, positive
relationships, enhanced
warmth and caring for
others
Strong and supportive family
ties improving family and
intimate relationship,
confident and responsible
parenting behaviours
UNCLASSIFIED
Evidence based
approaches to address
this reoffending factor
Promising
approaches (more
evidence needed)
Therapeutic approaches
for young adult
offenders that involve
the family (such as
multi-systemic therapy)
Relationship
coaching
interventions
Encouraging and
enabling family
visits to prisoners
Final hints
•
The most robust evaluations of impact require the collection of data for statistical
analysis.
•
Case studies and process evaluations can provide interesting and useful results
but may be limited in how widely the results can be generalised.
•
Just knowing how many in your cohort reoffended does not tell you what the
impact of your service was (i.e. The overall reoffending rate for “all prisons” or
“all offenders” or even the prison/Trust concerned is not an appropriate
comparison)
UNCLASSIFIED