ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluation capacity building in a rural Victorian community service organisation: A formative evaluation.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Building Rural Health Research Capacity Through Embedded Researchers and Ecosystem Development.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Community service organisations are increasingly required to report on outcomes and evaluate program delivery. While commonplace in clinical health settings, such work is novel to the community sector and can be challenging to undertake given resourcing and evaluation capacity constraints. These constraints are exacerbated for rural community service organisations that face additional resource pressures and lack organisational systems to support such work. This formative evaluation reports on an evaluation capacity building program within a rural place-based community service organisation in southwest Victoria, Australia. As part of the program, monitoring, evaluation, and learning pilots were implemented to support selected teams (N = 4 teams, N = 12 individuals) to increase confidence in outcomes measurement and reporting. Implementation strategies included training, creation of measurement frameworks, implementation of data collection tools, academic support, and emergence of evaluation champions. Evaluation data included administrative records and a staff survey. The Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance framework guided evaluation. Results indicated that participants reported high awareness, beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and skills in relation to monitoring, evaluation, and learning at the post-training/refinement period timepoint. However, several barriers limited implementation: reduced workforce capacity, prioritisation of client-driven or other work, leave or staff changes, additional responsibilities, waxing and waning engagement, wider program teams being unclear on the process and value of evaluation, and organisational barriers. These barriers led to a divergence from the planned outcome measures. Enablers to this work included physical presence to facilitate informal discussion, flexibility and openness to change, and communication to support staff. Learnings include the need to strengthen organisational evaluation culture, scaling-back the number of outcomes/data collection sources, and greater involvement with the wider staff cohort. These learnings provide a valuable foundation for other place-based community service organisations to implement evaluation capacity building strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.