A Deep Dive into What Are the Steps in the Process of Evaluation?

September 27, 2025 •

4 min read

Statistics show that effective evaluation is critical to the success of public health interventions, ensuring accountability and continuous improvement. Understanding what are the steps in the process of evaluation is therefore a fundamental skill for improving health outcomes and informing future strategies.

Quick Summary

A systematic evaluation involves engaging stakeholders, describing the program, focusing the design, gathering credible evidence, justifying conclusions based on data analysis, and using findings to improve future interventions or programs.

Key Points

Engage Stakeholders: Start by identifying and involving all relevant parties, including program staff, participants, and funders, to ensure relevance and credibility.
Describe the Program: Use a logic model to clearly define the program's inputs, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes before starting the evaluation.
Focus the Design: Select the most important questions and appropriate evaluation type, such as formative, process, outcome, or impact, to guide your methods.
Gather Credible Evidence: Collect both quantitative and qualitative data using a mix of methods like surveys, interviews, and record reviews to create a comprehensive picture.
Justify Conclusions: Analyze and interpret data, considering its limitations, to draw well-supported conclusions and answer your evaluation questions.
Ensure Use and Share Lessons: Communicate findings effectively to stakeholders with actionable recommendations to drive continuous improvement and future decisions.

Understanding the Evaluation Framework

In the context of general health, evaluation is a systematic process for assessing an intervention, program, or individual health status. It's not a single task, but a cycle of continuous learning and improvement. The framework recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides a clear, six-step approach that can be adapted for various health-related evaluations, from assessing a new wellness program to a comprehensive individual health check.

Step 1: Engage Stakeholders

This foundational step involves identifying all parties with an interest in the evaluation, from program participants and healthcare providers to funders and community leaders. Engaging them from the beginning helps ensure that the evaluation is relevant, useful, and credible. By understanding their perspectives and needs, you can formulate evaluation questions that matter and build support for the process and its findings. This step ensures ownership and that the results will be used effectively.

Identifying Key Stakeholders

Primary stakeholders: Those directly involved in the program or subject being evaluated, such as patients, staff, and direct administrators.
Secondary stakeholders: People or groups indirectly affected, including community members, family members, or other health organizations.
Tertiary stakeholders: The broader public or policy makers who may use the evaluation findings to inform decisions.

Step 2: Describe the Program or Subject

Before you can evaluate something, you must have a clear and detailed description of what it is. This step involves creating a robust program description, often through a 'logic model.' A logic model visually represents the program's components: its inputs (resources), activities (what the program does), outputs (tangible results of activities), and the expected outcomes and impact (short-term and long-term changes). For an individual health evaluation, this step corresponds to a comprehensive health assessment, including medical history, physical exam, and lifestyle factors.

Key elements to describe include:

Mission and goals: What the program or assessment aims to achieve.
Resources: The funding, personnel, and infrastructure available.
Activities: The specific actions or services provided.
Context: The environment in which the program operates, which can significantly influence outcomes.

Step 3: Focus the Evaluation Design

This step requires prioritizing the most important evaluation questions and choosing the appropriate methods to answer them. It involves making strategic choices based on the evaluation's purpose, the stakeholders' needs, and the available resources. This is also where you determine the type of evaluation—formative, process, outcome, or impact.

Types of health evaluation

Formative Evaluation: Focuses on improving a program during its initial development stages.
Process Evaluation: Assesses whether a program is being implemented as planned.
Outcome Evaluation: Measures the extent to which a program achieved its intended outcomes.
Impact Evaluation: Examines the long-term, broader effects of a program.

Step 4: Gather Credible Evidence

Collecting reliable and high-quality data is essential for drawing accurate conclusions. Evidence can be quantitative (numerical data from surveys or reports) or qualitative (descriptive data from interviews or focus groups). A credible evaluation often uses a mix of methods to provide a comprehensive picture.

Common data collection methods

Surveys and Questionnaires: For gathering structured, quantitative data from a large number of people.
Interviews and Focus Groups: For in-depth qualitative insights into participant experiences and perspectives.
Observation: To assess implementation fidelity and participant behavior directly.
Review of Records: Utilizing existing program or medical records for baseline and outcome data.

Step 5: Justify Conclusions

With the evidence gathered, the next step is to analyze and interpret the data to answer the evaluation questions. This involves synthesizing findings, comparing results against goals, and identifying trends. It is crucial to consider the limitations of the data to avoid overstating the results.

Interpreting the findings

Synthesize and analyze data: Look for patterns and themes in qualitative data and use statistical methods for quantitative data.
Compare with standards: Benchmark findings against best practices or program goals.
Acknowledge limitations: Document any potential biases or data gaps that might affect the conclusions.

Step 6: Ensure Use and Share Lessons

An evaluation is only valuable if its findings are used to inform decisions. This final step involves communicating the results to stakeholders in a clear, action-oriented manner. Reports can be tailored to different audiences—from detailed findings for funders to one-page summaries for program staff. The goal is to facilitate learning and drive continuous improvement. A key part of this process is generating actionable recommendations that are realistic and tailored to the users.

Communicating effectively

Tailor the message: Adjust the format and content for different stakeholders.
Provide recommendations: Make clear, actionable suggestions based on the findings.
Facilitate follow-up: Ensure there is a process for monitoring and applying the lessons learned.

Comparison of Evaluation Types


Evaluation Type	Timing	Primary Purpose	Key Questions	Example in Health
Formative	Early Stage	Improve Program	Are our plans and materials appropriate and feasible?	Pre-testing patient educational materials.
Process	Ongoing	Assess Implementation	Is the program being delivered as intended?	Tracking attendance rates at a wellness class.
Outcome	Intermediate	Measure Outcomes	Did the program achieve its intended goals?	Measuring a change in blood pressure after an intervention.
Impact	End-of-program/Long-term	Assess Broad Effects	Did the program cause the broader, long-term changes?	Assessing overall health outcomes or cost savings for a community.

Conclusion

Navigating what are the steps in the process of evaluation is a roadmap to creating effective and sustainable health interventions. By systematically engaging stakeholders, defining the subject, designing the evaluation, gathering credible evidence, justifying conclusions, and ensuring the findings are put to good use, we can move beyond simply providing services to genuinely improving health and well-being. This structured process fosters accountability, enables learning, and ultimately strengthens the impact of all health initiatives.

For more detailed guidance on public health program evaluation, refer to the CDC's Program Evaluation Framework.

Frequently Asked Questions

The primary purpose is to systematically assess the relevance, effectiveness, and impact of a health program or intervention. It helps determine if goals are being met, informs decision-making, and identifies areas for improvement to optimize health outcomes.

The type of evaluation depends on the stage and purpose of the program. For a new program, a formative evaluation is best. To see if it's running correctly, use a process evaluation. For short-term results, choose an outcome evaluation, and for long-term effects, an impact evaluation is appropriate.

Everyone with a vested interest should be involved, including program developers and staff, participants, community members, funders, and policy makers. Engaging these stakeholders ensures the evaluation questions are relevant and the findings are utilized.

Quantitative data is numerical and can be measured (e.g., patient statistics, test scores), while qualitative data is descriptive and captures context and experiences (e.g., interview transcripts, open-ended survey responses). A mix of both provides a more complete picture.

Evaluation findings are used to refine program design, delivery, and resources. Negative results can help identify problems, while positive results can highlight effective strategies that can be expanded or replicated. They provide an evidence base for making informed changes.

A logic model is a visual representation of how a program is supposed to work. It outlines the logical connections between resources, activities, and expected results. It’s important because it provides a clear roadmap for what to measure and evaluate.

After reporting, the focus shifts to ensuring the findings are used. This includes communicating lessons learned to the right audiences, developing an action plan based on recommendations, and monitoring progress to ensure continuous improvement.