In Step 6 of the text, you learned about the importance of the evaluation component to both the grant-seeking organization and the funder. There is some debate as to whether the evaluation function is better performed by the grant-seeking organization (i.e., internal evaluation), or by an external evaluator.
Search the Internet and/or the online library for articles about the pros and cons of using internal versus external evaluators. In your discussion response, share your thoughts on which you think is more appropriate (internal or external evaluation), and include an advantage and disadvantage for each. Be sure to make reference(s) to the article(s) or website(s) you identify to support your points. Identify which type of evaluation you would recommend for your grant proposal and why. Support your initial and subsequent posts by citing at least two academic resources
Notes from the professor:
Evaluation of an organization is critical. Without it, you may not know where you are, how you are doing. Most funders will want an evaluation of what they are funding for similar reasons. So, who will do that? Bothe the funder and the recipient will want this.
External evaluators can, obviously be more objective to the organizations and the process. But they may have their own agenda. They can have more expertise in the process of evaluating, but that could leave the organization being evaluated not understanding some aspects of the process. Experts can be more efficient, since there is no learning curve for the evaluation process.
Internal evaluation may seem too subjective, but who knows that project/organization better?
We are quickly back to the objectives and goals that were set out. How and when will these be evaluated? What will constitute a success? Were the methods adequate? Does the organization need to make adjustments? Are we looking at qualitative or quantitative analyses (or both)?
The Discussion Forum asks you to look who should be doing the evaluation of the funder and the organization
