FIELD NETWORK RESEARCH IN POLICY EVALUATION |
| |
| Authors: | Paul R. Dommol John Stuart Hall |
| |
| Affiliation: | PAUL R. DOMMEL is a Professor and Chairman of the Department of Political Science a t Cleveland State University. He is the author of The Politics of Revenue Sharing and co-author of Decentralizing Urban Policy. He has written numerous articles and book chapters on urban policy and intergovernmental fiscal relations. He was formerly a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution where he directed a field network study of the community development block grant program.;JOHN STUART HALL, Professor and Director of the Center for Public Affairs a t Arizona State University, is the author or co-author of numerous books and articles on American Federalism and Urban Policy. His most recent book is Reconsidering American Politics (with Nicholas Henry). He has served as a consultant andlor research associate on field network evaluations conducted by Brookings Institution, Princeton University, The National Academy of Science, Northwestern University and the Urban Institute. |
| |
| Abstract: | The field-network evaluation studies (FNES) approach to policy evaluation research seeks to overcome deficiencies of small-sample case study method and of the large-sample survey research approach. Methodologically, FNES uses many of the familiar techniques of both these approaches interviews, data collection and analysis, limited sampling, field observation, and document analysis. The crucial difference is sample size. The FNES approach using a middle-range sample of 50 to 60 research sites has the advantages of the case study method in being able to provide an in depth account of a program and how it operates, and is sufficiently flexible to permit a shift in the analytical framework as the research proceeds thus overcoming the inflexibility of the instruments of survey research.
Seven major studies employing the FNES approach have been carried out or are underway in the United States of America. The principal components of the methodology are a network of university-based field associates and a central management group. The field associates collect the information and the data using a uniform analytical framework and reporting form. The central staff aggregates these analyses into a single report that cuts across the sample. This approach and the use of a middle-range sample make it possible to draw generalizable conclusions based on the national experience, and also provide sufficient detail to differentiate policy impacts among the sample jurisdictions. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
