Abstract
Within the mixed economy of care in the United Kingdom there are debates about the ways in which impact can be evaluated, in order to shape funding and policy decisions. One of the tensions evident in this debate is whether the evaluation approach should reflect the perspectives and goals of the voluntary organizations and their members, or whether evaluation should reflect the wider goals of the whole system of provision. The former runs the risk of being insular and self-congratulatory, while the latter may be inappropriate and dismissive of achievements. This paper explores this tension by reporting on a study that used Appreciative Inquiry to evaluate 10 small-scale not-for-profit schemes for older people. The data indicated some unexpected and long-term impacts that demonstrated the distinctiveness of the sector. Subsequently the findings were mapped on to the “impact grid” developed by Wilding and Lacey (2003). While this was straightforward at the levels of individuals and interorganizationally, it was more difficult at the sector/community level, suggesting that more work needs to be done to bring these two perspectives together.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Billis, D., and Glennerster, H. (1998). Human services and the voluntary sector: Towards a theory of comparative advantage. Journal of Social Policy 27(1), 79–98.
Bushe, G. R. (1988). Appreciative inquiry with teams. The Organization Development Journal 16(3), 41–50.
Collis, B., Lacey, M., O’Hagan, S., Shah, R., Wainwright, S., and Wilding, K. (2003). Measuring Impact: Case Studies of Small and Medium-Sized Voluntary Organisations, National Council for Voluntary Organisations, London.
Glover, T. D. (2004). Narrative inquiry and the study of grassroots associations. Voluntas 15(1), 47–69.
Her Majesty’s Treasury (2002). The Role of the Voluntary and Community Sector in Service Delivery: A Cross-Cutting Review, The Stationary Office, London.
Hammond, S. (1986). The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry, 2nd edn., Thin Book, Edinburgh.
Leat, D. (1995). Theoretical differences between for-profit and non-profit organisations. In: D. Leat (ed.), Challenging Management, City University Business School, London, Appendix One.
Ludema, J. D., Cooperider, D., and Barret, F. J. (2001). Appreciative inquiry: The power of the Positive Questions. In: P. Reason and H. Bradburg (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 189–199.
Knapp, M., Robertson, E., and Thomason, C. (1990). Public money, voluntary action: whose welfare? In: H. K. Anheier and W. Seibel (eds.), The Third Sector: Comparative Studies of Nonprofit Organisations, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 183–218.
Paton, R., and Foot, J. (2000). Nonprofit’s use of awards to improve and demonstrate performance: Valuable discipline or burdensome formalities? Voluntas 11(4), 329–353.
Reed, J., Pearson, P., Douglas, B., Swinburne, S., and Wilding, H. (2002). Going home from hospital: An appreciative inquiry study. Health and Social Care and the Community 10(1), 36–45.
Sanders, J. R. (2003). Mainstreaming evaluation. New Directions in Evaluation 99, 3–6.
Sjöstrand, S.-E. (2000). The organization of non-profit activities. Voluntas 11(3), 199–215.
Steier, F. (1991). Research and Reflexivity, Sage, London.
Taylor, M., and Warburton, D. (2003). Legitimacy and the role of UK third sector organizations in the policy process. Voluntas 14(3), 321–338.
Wilding, K., and Lacey, M. (2003). Lessons learnt and guidance for future work. In: B. Collis, M. Lacey, S. O’Hagan, R. Shah, S. Wainwright, and K. Wilding (eds.), Measuring Impact: Case Studies of Small and Medium Sized Voluntary Organizations, National Council for Voluntary Organizations, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reed, J., Jones, D. & Irvine, J. Appreciating Impact: Evaluating Small Voluntary Organizations in the United Kingdom. Voluntas 16, 123–141 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-005-5694-4
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-005-5694-4