Distance travelled: a new PIEs Evaluation framework
One of the key issues both for research and evaluation is: to what extent can such and such a service actually call itself a PIE?  How far have they gone and in what areas?


We are now able to unveil the work we have been doing on a PIEs evaluation framework. This is not, that is, a framework for assessing the effectiveness of a PIE service (there are other tools that aim to do that). Instead, this aims to create a specification and self-assessment tool to asses how far a service is a PIE at all.  This is a major new initiative for the PIElink community and for the development and promotion of PIEs in practice; and in research.  

The papers here first make a case for the development of such an assessment and specification tool; and outline the preliminary work, to date. We spell out what we propose as the underlying or guiding principles behind such an approach, seeing these then as requirements, for any successful measurement 'tool'.

Then we consider how to handle those areas in the original ( or "classic" ) PIE framework that may need some careful thought, up-dating and/or modification; and then explore some comparisons with other quite useful approaches to measurement of a complex, multi-faceted activity, from which we might learn some useful lessons 

But we also stress that further work on this should be a co-production, with active in-put services in the sector. We have therefore been recruiting for a small on-line working party to look at developing this framework as a practical evaluation tool, one that allows practitioners, managers, commissioners and researchers alike to ask, not just: 'How far has this service come?' but also: 'And where do we/they now need to go?'

This area is divided into sections, for (somewhat) easier reading; but primarily to allow us to update it, as issues and thinking develop.  These sections, with titles and links,  are listed in the right hand panel.


NB: Assuming that those in the working party will be testing out the approach, as it develops, with their own organisations and services in mind, the primary task of the working party is then to get - if we can - this proposal to the point where we are ready to pilot it outside the working party. But a key secondary aim is to get a sufficiently wide representation to have some reasonable credibility, if taking this initiative then to a funding organisation, in hopes to secure costs for a proper, fully independent evaluation of the approach, as the next stage.  (The eventual cost implications of such a programme of work are also covered.)