This document provides guidance for policymakers on testing social innovation policies at the local and regional level through impact evaluations. It discusses defining the policy or intervention to be evaluated, developing a theory of change, specifying outcomes and indicators, estimating the counterfactual, analyzing effects, disseminating findings, and applying lessons learned to future reforms. The goal is to help policymakers design strong evaluations that produce reliable evidence of what works to inform decision-making and ongoing social innovation efforts.
Stakeholder involvement for local Action Plans definition: approach, methods ...Sabrina Franceschini
CO-EVOLVE4BG Co-evolution of coastal human activities & Med natural systems for sustainable tourism & Blue Growth in the Mediterranean
kick-off Meeting 19th September 2019 – Gammarth (Tunisia)
Policy Making and Decision Making in EducationDjadja Sardjana
What is Policy?
Decision makers, who are used to depending on their past experiences, must make decisions and take actions in the rapidly changing world we face today. In this turbulent environment, the ability to successfully view the current situation through the traditional "good judgment" viewpoint is weakened through increasing external noise (a multitude of information sources on multiple topics) and changing paradigms of how we think about social, cultural, organizational and economic issues, creating internal noise within our prevailing mental models. These noises skew our perception of what is really happening in the world. In addition to facing this constant flux, leaders are being asked to choose the path to the future as well as to explain exactly how they plan to get there. Before putting a stake in the sand, leaders begin by developing and testing hypotheses about possible scenarios, and then eliminate numerous courses of action until a small set of viable choices remain. Once the decision to act is made, the communication of the new initiatives begins. The results of these initiatives usually produce some expected behavior, but almost always, much to our surprise, our actions produce unexpected behavior as well, that once again changes our situation. And so it goes…
Quick facts on measure selection. Selecting the most effective packages of measures for Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans.
Measure selection is the process of identifying the most suitable and cost effective mobility and transport measures to achieve the vision and objectives of a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) and to overcome the identified local problems. Even where vision, objectives and problems are defined, it may not be obvious what measures are most appropriate.
Stakeholder involvement for local Action Plans definition: approach, methods ...Sabrina Franceschini
CO-EVOLVE4BG Co-evolution of coastal human activities & Med natural systems for sustainable tourism & Blue Growth in the Mediterranean
kick-off Meeting 19th September 2019 – Gammarth (Tunisia)
Policy Making and Decision Making in EducationDjadja Sardjana
What is Policy?
Decision makers, who are used to depending on their past experiences, must make decisions and take actions in the rapidly changing world we face today. In this turbulent environment, the ability to successfully view the current situation through the traditional "good judgment" viewpoint is weakened through increasing external noise (a multitude of information sources on multiple topics) and changing paradigms of how we think about social, cultural, organizational and economic issues, creating internal noise within our prevailing mental models. These noises skew our perception of what is really happening in the world. In addition to facing this constant flux, leaders are being asked to choose the path to the future as well as to explain exactly how they plan to get there. Before putting a stake in the sand, leaders begin by developing and testing hypotheses about possible scenarios, and then eliminate numerous courses of action until a small set of viable choices remain. Once the decision to act is made, the communication of the new initiatives begins. The results of these initiatives usually produce some expected behavior, but almost always, much to our surprise, our actions produce unexpected behavior as well, that once again changes our situation. And so it goes…
Quick facts on measure selection. Selecting the most effective packages of measures for Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans.
Measure selection is the process of identifying the most suitable and cost effective mobility and transport measures to achieve the vision and objectives of a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) and to overcome the identified local problems. Even where vision, objectives and problems are defined, it may not be obvious what measures are most appropriate.
paper critically evaluates how effective social impact measurement can lead to the legitimacy and prospering of social enterprises (SEs). Effective balancing of economic and social purposes contributes towards high SEs performance and should be mirrored in specific monetarized indicators. There is no doubt that effective measurement of the operations and the outputs of SEs is a step toward achieving the desirable social change and at the same time remaining a healthy and sustainable as an entity. Trade-offs and tensions are inevitable in dual purpose organizations and success is more likely when leaders of SEs address them on hand. I focus my examination on the Social Return of Investment (SROI) framework which was significant developed both from the academic and business community. SROI tool is not just a descriptive report. It is a methodology that turns the benefits of social action into a monetary equivalent. This makes social impact more readily assessable and controllable, especially for financial markets participants like banks and debt providers, who appreciate monetizing. Social Businesses can use this tool in order to keep a sustainable long-lasting operation and to evaluate the outcomes of their social projects. The importance of a more holistic performance measurement system is highlighted across all this thesis. I demonstrate the process of measuring a social impact equal to 4.43 using SROI for a Greek social venture and I identify common misunderstandings and difficulties accompanied with the measurement process.
The social audit Toolkit provides practical guidance and insights to its users working in government departments, community organizations and civil society groups for using social audit as a tool to identify, measure, assess and report on the social performance of their organizations. This toolkit has been designed keeping in mind the views and the needs of non-specialists interested in conducting social audit. The objective of the Consultant in developing this tool-kit is to provide not only a comprehensive but also an easy-to-use tool-kit for government departments, CSOs and others.
This tool-kit comprises of introduction to the concepts, steps, the purpose and templates / forms of conducting social audit which will help in understanding the framework of social audit; describes how this curriculum is to be used in a sequential process for conducting social audit and the preparation of social audit report.
International Economic Policy Analysis for Africa and developing countries.pptxGeorgeKabongah2
This course provides the theoretical, historical, institutional and technical background for effective advocacy of international economic policy.
The focus is on the political economy of international trade, foreign direct investment, exchange rates, portfolio capital flows and the balance of payments, industrial policy and international labor migration.
It is not a course on economics and students are not expected to have any background in the study of economics though some economic concepts will be employed and discussed.
1
Stakeholder Involvement In Evaluation Planning
Student Name
Institution Name
Course Number
Due Date
Faculty Name
Topic: Stakeholder Involvement In evaluation Planning
Stakeholders are the people that are at stake on the evaluation. They are individuals that have interest in or are impacted by evaluation and its results. I would consider involving stakeholders in health program planning. Stakeholders have the ability to provide ideas and aidin the creation of potential solutions (Ferreira,et al., 2020). In most cases stakeholders are from various backgrounds; they therefore look at issues from various perspectives.this allows opposing viewpoints to be expressed and also discussed. Engaging stakeholders from the planning stage, maximizes the chance of project success through the final execution. They may as well aid in preventing unforeseen problems (Michnej, & Zwolinski, 2018). They have a great influence on the community of animal lovers, thus it is imperative to have an advocate instead of an adversary.
I would consider facilitating stakeholder’s involvement through maintaining open communication. The stakeholders need to be updated on the organization’s core purpose. It is essential to be consistent in the messages, and use them to show employees how they fit in the plan as well as how their contributions have aided in shaping the decisions made (Smith, 2017). Individuals that know what is expected as well as how they contribute tend to be more engaged and committed in comparison to those that do not. It is essential to ensure that the stakeholders know where they fit in. engaging employees in the planning process aids in building ownership in the firm.
References
Ferreira, V., Barreira, A. P., Loures, L., Antunes, D., & Panagopoulos, T. (2020). Stakeholders’ engagement on nature-based solutions: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12(2), 640.
Michnej, M., & Zwoliński, T. (2018). The role and responsibility of stakeholders in the planning process of the sustainable urban mobility in the city Krakow. Transport Economics and Logistics, 80, 159-167.
Smith, P. A. (2017). Stakeholder engagement framework. Information & Security, 38, 35-45.
TOPIC: Strategies and Ethics
As the director of the local public health department, you are preparing to conduct a town hall presentation. In it you will communicate the direction of the strategic plan. Your audience will include collaborative partners (invested stakeholders) such as academicians, health professionals, state health department staff, representatives from affected communities, and representatives from nongovernmental organizations.
Recall that your Stakeholder Involvement in Evaluation Planning discussion in Unit 5 reviewed the planning and evaluation cycle (Figure 11-1 in your textbook). In addition, in that discussion you explained where in the cycle and how you would seek stakeholder involvement in evaluation planning. The town hall presentation is on ...
Streams of Social Impact Work: Building Bridges in a New Evaluation Era with ...The Rockefeller Foundation
This working paper addresses the gaps and opportunities between the approaches of traditional public sector and NGO program evaluation and the social impact measurement approaches of new market-oriented players.
The authors posit that a convergence of these cultures would generate enormous rewards for both constituencies. New methodologies, evaluative tools and strategic learning processes would enrich social impact work, private giving and public-private partnerships. More nimble and business-like evaluation approaches would benefit traditional evaluation players and civil society. Thus bridging the divide would contribute to the rigor and utility of methods and practices and advance the effectiveness of evaluation everywhere.
Evidence on Improving Health Service Delivery in Developing CountriesIDS
This presentation by David Peters of the Future Health Systems Consortium was given at the Global Symposium on Health Systems Research in November 2010.
This presentation follows on our previous work from measuring the impact and return on investment of social, community, enterprise development programs. This presentation provides evidence of our work, our methodology and the impact that we measure of development practices. Our impact assessment methodology was developed for Africa, by Africa and is aimed at practitioners from both the investment and development fraternity.
paper critically evaluates how effective social impact measurement can lead to the legitimacy and prospering of social enterprises (SEs). Effective balancing of economic and social purposes contributes towards high SEs performance and should be mirrored in specific monetarized indicators. There is no doubt that effective measurement of the operations and the outputs of SEs is a step toward achieving the desirable social change and at the same time remaining a healthy and sustainable as an entity. Trade-offs and tensions are inevitable in dual purpose organizations and success is more likely when leaders of SEs address them on hand. I focus my examination on the Social Return of Investment (SROI) framework which was significant developed both from the academic and business community. SROI tool is not just a descriptive report. It is a methodology that turns the benefits of social action into a monetary equivalent. This makes social impact more readily assessable and controllable, especially for financial markets participants like banks and debt providers, who appreciate monetizing. Social Businesses can use this tool in order to keep a sustainable long-lasting operation and to evaluate the outcomes of their social projects. The importance of a more holistic performance measurement system is highlighted across all this thesis. I demonstrate the process of measuring a social impact equal to 4.43 using SROI for a Greek social venture and I identify common misunderstandings and difficulties accompanied with the measurement process.
The social audit Toolkit provides practical guidance and insights to its users working in government departments, community organizations and civil society groups for using social audit as a tool to identify, measure, assess and report on the social performance of their organizations. This toolkit has been designed keeping in mind the views and the needs of non-specialists interested in conducting social audit. The objective of the Consultant in developing this tool-kit is to provide not only a comprehensive but also an easy-to-use tool-kit for government departments, CSOs and others.
This tool-kit comprises of introduction to the concepts, steps, the purpose and templates / forms of conducting social audit which will help in understanding the framework of social audit; describes how this curriculum is to be used in a sequential process for conducting social audit and the preparation of social audit report.
International Economic Policy Analysis for Africa and developing countries.pptxGeorgeKabongah2
This course provides the theoretical, historical, institutional and technical background for effective advocacy of international economic policy.
The focus is on the political economy of international trade, foreign direct investment, exchange rates, portfolio capital flows and the balance of payments, industrial policy and international labor migration.
It is not a course on economics and students are not expected to have any background in the study of economics though some economic concepts will be employed and discussed.
1
Stakeholder Involvement In Evaluation Planning
Student Name
Institution Name
Course Number
Due Date
Faculty Name
Topic: Stakeholder Involvement In evaluation Planning
Stakeholders are the people that are at stake on the evaluation. They are individuals that have interest in or are impacted by evaluation and its results. I would consider involving stakeholders in health program planning. Stakeholders have the ability to provide ideas and aidin the creation of potential solutions (Ferreira,et al., 2020). In most cases stakeholders are from various backgrounds; they therefore look at issues from various perspectives.this allows opposing viewpoints to be expressed and also discussed. Engaging stakeholders from the planning stage, maximizes the chance of project success through the final execution. They may as well aid in preventing unforeseen problems (Michnej, & Zwolinski, 2018). They have a great influence on the community of animal lovers, thus it is imperative to have an advocate instead of an adversary.
I would consider facilitating stakeholder’s involvement through maintaining open communication. The stakeholders need to be updated on the organization’s core purpose. It is essential to be consistent in the messages, and use them to show employees how they fit in the plan as well as how their contributions have aided in shaping the decisions made (Smith, 2017). Individuals that know what is expected as well as how they contribute tend to be more engaged and committed in comparison to those that do not. It is essential to ensure that the stakeholders know where they fit in. engaging employees in the planning process aids in building ownership in the firm.
References
Ferreira, V., Barreira, A. P., Loures, L., Antunes, D., & Panagopoulos, T. (2020). Stakeholders’ engagement on nature-based solutions: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12(2), 640.
Michnej, M., & Zwoliński, T. (2018). The role and responsibility of stakeholders in the planning process of the sustainable urban mobility in the city Krakow. Transport Economics and Logistics, 80, 159-167.
Smith, P. A. (2017). Stakeholder engagement framework. Information & Security, 38, 35-45.
TOPIC: Strategies and Ethics
As the director of the local public health department, you are preparing to conduct a town hall presentation. In it you will communicate the direction of the strategic plan. Your audience will include collaborative partners (invested stakeholders) such as academicians, health professionals, state health department staff, representatives from affected communities, and representatives from nongovernmental organizations.
Recall that your Stakeholder Involvement in Evaluation Planning discussion in Unit 5 reviewed the planning and evaluation cycle (Figure 11-1 in your textbook). In addition, in that discussion you explained where in the cycle and how you would seek stakeholder involvement in evaluation planning. The town hall presentation is on ...
Streams of Social Impact Work: Building Bridges in a New Evaluation Era with ...The Rockefeller Foundation
This working paper addresses the gaps and opportunities between the approaches of traditional public sector and NGO program evaluation and the social impact measurement approaches of new market-oriented players.
The authors posit that a convergence of these cultures would generate enormous rewards for both constituencies. New methodologies, evaluative tools and strategic learning processes would enrich social impact work, private giving and public-private partnerships. More nimble and business-like evaluation approaches would benefit traditional evaluation players and civil society. Thus bridging the divide would contribute to the rigor and utility of methods and practices and advance the effectiveness of evaluation everywhere.
Evidence on Improving Health Service Delivery in Developing CountriesIDS
This presentation by David Peters of the Future Health Systems Consortium was given at the Global Symposium on Health Systems Research in November 2010.
This presentation follows on our previous work from measuring the impact and return on investment of social, community, enterprise development programs. This presentation provides evidence of our work, our methodology and the impact that we measure of development practices. Our impact assessment methodology was developed for Africa, by Africa and is aimed at practitioners from both the investment and development fraternity.
Within the framework of its Research Communications Capacity Building Program, GDNet produced, in collaboration with CommsConsult, a range of learning materials with the aim to develop an influence plan. These handouts cover the influence plan’s implications, challenges and structure; setting CIPPEC’s influence plan as an example, shedding light on its communication strategy as well as some of the lessons learned from its experience.
WHY STUDY PUBLIC POLICY? WHAT MAKES IT IMPORTANT NOW MORE THAN EVER?Indian School
Indian School of Public Policy throwing light on the importance of public policy, why it must be studied, and its scope.
Read more - https://www.ispp.org.in/blog-post/why-study-public-policy-what-makes-it-important-now-more-than-ever/
172017 Public Health What It Is and How It Workshttps.docxfelicidaddinwoodie
1/7/2017 Public Health: What It Is and How It Works
https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781284046342/cfi/12!/4/2/22/6/[email protected]:33.0 1/2
PRINTED BY: [email protected] Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book
may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.
mobilization and constituency building. PATCH focuses on orienting and training community leaders and other
community participants in all aspects of the community needs assessment process and includes excellent
documentation and resource materials. Although originally developed by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) to focus on chronic health conditions and stimulate health promotion and disease prevention
interventions, PATCH is flexible enough to be used in a wide variety of community health needs assessment
applications.
Another important tool for addressing public health core functions and their associated processes is Model
Standards, Healthy Communities.8 The steps outlined for implementation of the Model Standards process in the
community link many of the various core functionrelated tools; they represent, in effect, a pathway for
organizations to participate in community health improvement activities.
1. Assessment of organizational role. Communities are organized and structured differently. As a result, the
specific roles of local public health organizations will vary from community to community. An essential
first step is to reexamine organizational purpose and mission and develop a longrange vision through
strategic planning involving its internal and external constituencies. The resulting mission statement and
longrange vision serve to guide the organization (leadership and board, as well as employees) and to define
it for its community partners. This critical step should be completed before the remaining steps can be
successfully addressed. Part I of APEXPH and the expanded strategic planning elements of MAPP are
useful in accomplishing this task.
2. Assessment of organizational capacity. After mission and role have been defined, it is necessary to
examine an organization’s capacity to carry out its role in the community. This calls for an assessment of
the major operational elements of the organization, including its structure and performance for specific
tasks. This type of organizational and local public health system selfassessment is best carried out through
broad participation from all levels. Both APEXPH and MAPP include hundreds of indicators that can be
used in this capacity assessment. These indicators can be modified or eliminated if deemed inappropriate,
and additional indicators can also be used. This step serves to identify strengths and weaknesses relative to
mission and role.
3. Development of a capacitybuilding plan. The development of a capacitybuilding plan incorporates the
organization’s strengths and prioritizes its weaknesses so that the m ...
Similar to ASIS project - Guidelines #4 - TESTING NEW SOCIAL INNOVATION POLICIES ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL (20)
Social innovation strategy Newsletter, April 2020.pdfarmelleguillermet
Get inspired by the newsletter of the Alpine Space Social Innovation strategy project to build new public policy and to better support and accompany innovation - April 2020 issue -
Social innovation strategy Newsletter, December 2021.pdfarmelleguillermet
Get inspired by the newsletter of the Alpine Space Social Innovation strategy project to build new public policy and to better support and accompany innovation - December 2021 issue -
ASIS - Guideline #5 - FR - Les recommandations suivantes s'adressent aux autorités publiques, agences de financement ou toute autre entité lançant un appel à projets d'innovation sociale.
ASIS - Training #5 - Metodologia generale per lo sviluppo/miglioramento delle...armelleguillermet
ASIS - Training #5 - Metodologia generale per lo sviluppo/miglioramento delle politiche pubbliche a sostegno dell'Innovazione Sociale (IS) basata sull'approccio dal basso verso l'alto
ASIS - Training #5 - Méthodologie générale pour le développement/l'améliorati...armelleguillermet
ASIS - Training #5 - Méthodologie générale pour le développement/l'amélioration des politiques publiques de soutien à l'innovation sociale (IS) basée sur l'approche ascendante
ASIS - TRAINING #5 - Allgemeine Methodik für die Entwicklung / Verbesserung ö...armelleguillermet
ASIS - TRAINING #5 - Allgemeine Methodik für die Entwicklung / Verbesserung öffentlicher Politiken zur Unterstützung sozialer Innovation (SI) auf der Grundlage des Bottom-up-AnsatzesASIS Online-Schulung
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
What is the point of small housing associations.pptxPaul Smith
Given the small scale of housing associations and their relative high cost per home what is the point of them and how do we justify their continued existance
A process server is a authorized person for delivering legal documents, such as summons, complaints, subpoenas, and other court papers, to peoples involved in legal proceedings.
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
Many ways to support street children.pptxSERUDS INDIA
By raising awareness, providing support, advocating for change, and offering assistance to children in need, individuals can play a crucial role in improving the lives of street children and helping them realize their full potential
Donate Us
https://serudsindia.org/how-individuals-can-support-street-children-in-india/
#donatefororphan, #donateforhomelesschildren, #childeducation, #ngochildeducation, #donateforeducation, #donationforchildeducation, #sponsorforpoorchild, #sponsororphanage #sponsororphanchild, #donation, #education, #charity, #educationforchild, #seruds, #kurnool, #joyhome
This session provides a comprehensive overview of the latest updates to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (commonly known as the Uniform Guidance) outlined in the 2 CFR 200.
With a focus on the 2024 revisions issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), participants will gain insight into the key changes affecting federal grant recipients. The session will delve into critical regulatory updates, providing attendees with the knowledge and tools necessary to navigate and comply with the evolving landscape of federal grant management.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand the rationale behind the 2024 updates to the Uniform Guidance outlined in 2 CFR 200, and their implications for federal grant recipients.
- Identify the key changes and revisions introduced by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the 2024 edition of 2 CFR 200.
- Gain proficiency in applying the updated regulations to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements and avoid potential audit findings.
- Develop strategies for effectively implementing the new guidelines within the grant management processes of their respective organizations, fostering efficiency and accountability in federal grant administration.
2. 2
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
TABLE OF CONTENT
Introduction 3
What is the purpose of this Guide? 4
Who should read this guide? 4
Step 1: Defining policies and interventions 5
Step 2: Specifying a ‘theory of change’ 7
Step 3: Defining outcomes, outcome indicators and data
collection plans 10
Step 4: Estimating the counterfactual 10
Step 5: Analysing and interpreting the effect of the
intervention 14
Step 6: Disseminating findings 15
Step 7: From local to global 15
Seven principles of socially innovative policymaking 16
1. CHALLENGE-FOCUSED 16
2. OPENNESS 16
3. HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN (HCD) 17
4. COLLABORATION/CO-DESIGN 17
5. EXPERIMENTATION AND EVIDENCE 17
6. ITERATION 17
7. CONNECTING AND SCALING 17
Conclusion 18
Case Study 19
3. 3
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Introduction
In the EU, social innovation has been posited as a
solution to both old and new social risks at a time
of heightened uncertainty and pressure on public
administrations and finances.1
Across Europe there
are many initiatives operating nationally and trans-
nationally that have been designed to support so-
cial innovation, but we’re still some way away from
a well-developed field of ‘social innovation policy’.2
Social innovation public policies mean developing
1Bonoli 2005; OECD 2011; Sinclair and Baglioni 2014
2https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/693883
Modernisation of
SI public policies
requires systematic
introduction of ex-ante
result orientation in
financing decisions and
a systematic approach
of the role public
policies on SI play in the
different stages in life.
new ideas, services and models to help address the
current societal challenges for delivering better so-
cial outcomes. It can help nurture the current fragile economic recovery with
improved social and economic outcomes in the medium and long term. It invol-
ves new ways of organising systems and therefore invites input from public and
private actors, including civil society.
As a tool to provide better and innovative solutions to social challenges. It also
stresses the need for modernisation of welfare states given the implications of
the demographic change and of the financial and economic crisis. Modernisa-
tion of SI public policies requires systematic introduction of ex-ante result orien-
tation in financing decisions and a systematic approach of the role public policies
on SI play in the different stages in life.
The role of policy makers is crucial in guiding the reform process, se-
lecting the appropriate policy priorities and for an effective follow-up
and increased sustainability of the results.
In order to play this function, policy makers need tools that allow them to assess
the investment returns of the chosen policies in terms of social outcomes (in-
crease in inclusion and employment, reduction in cost of service at same quality
level, contribution to the economy...).
There are different evaluation methods available to policy makers depending on
the specific features of the policy to be assessed. These methods can provide evi-
dence of positive outcomes of policies and support policy decisions.
Different methods can be used to measure the impact of a policy and gain evi-
dence on effective social policy reforms. This guide will focus on commonly used
methods, including:
1. Randomised Controlled Trials;
2. Differences-in-Differences;
3. Statistical matching;
4. Regression Discontinuity Design.
4. 4
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
What is the purpose of this Guide?
This guide is meant as a companion
to policy-makers and social service
providers wishing to implement social
innovation public policies and evaluate
the impact of their interventions. It
addresses three important and related
questions:
How to evaluate the impact of a social
innovation policy intervention. Which
methods are applicable and under
which assumptions they work?
How to design an impact evaluation?
The most important decisions related
to an impact evaluation will be made
at the planning phase. A rushed and
superficial plan is likely to result in
interesting questions remaining
unanswered or inadequately
answered due to poor or missing
data. This Guide sheds light on the
critical decisions that need to be
made at an early stage and the trade-
offs that they involve.
How to assess and disseminate its
results, on the basis of their reliability,
transferability, and sustainability?
This Guide is intended to support at national, regional and local level - Policy-
makers; i.e. those formulating policies, be it through programmes, legislation or
social dialogue. Among them, this Guide aims to support those seeking to build
evidence and/or use evidence about ‘what works’ for social innovation public
policy creations.
WHO SHOULD READ THIS GUIDE?
How to use the result to create
knowledge that can feed into fine-
tuning ongoing reforms, inspiring
new change and building-upon to
create additional knowledge? This is
about participating in a community
that builds and shares experience;
this is about policy-makers sharing
reliable experience across borders.
4 IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:
How to evaluate the impact of
SI policy intervention?
How to design an impact
evaluation?
How to assess and disseminate
results?
How to use the results to create
new and ongoing reforms and
inspire new change?
5. 5
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Step 1: Defining policies and interventions
Policy as social innovation
Policymaking can be socially innovative in
process, when it adopts the principles and
tools of social innovation. We call this ‘policy
as social innovation’.
3 p.7, 8; Social Innovation policy in Europe: Where next?, Social Innovation Community, 2017, Sophie Reynolds
(Nesta), Madeleine Gabriel (Nesta), Charlotte Heales (The Young Foundation)
Policymakers are
interested in social
innovation for its potential
to make a positive
difference to people’s lives.
Policy for social innovation
Public policy can enhance supply of and demand for social innovation, as well as
creating a wider environment in which social innovations can thrive. We call this
‘policy for social innovation’.
Social innovation policy as intervention
An intervention is an action taken to solve a problem. In the area of medical
research an intervention is a treatment administered with the aim of improving
a health disorder. The relative simplicity of the medical treatment makes it easily
replicable; this partly explains why the whole idea of experimentation hatched
and the method is so compelling in the medical context. Social innovation policy
interventions, on the other hand, have different and arguably more far-fetched
aims. To assess social innovation policy interventions, we might need to combine
several methods.
On one hand, governments explore ways in
which policy can stimulate and support social
innovation. Largely, these efforts have been
concerned with putting in place the supports
and conditions needed for a thriving social
market economy. There are also examples of
public officials engaging directly with social innovators to meets citizens’ needs
in new ways, for example by commissioning, funding or partnering with social
enterprises to deliver public services.
The use of social innovation tools in policymaking falls mainly into the realm of
‘public sector innovation’. This involves ‘creating, developing and implementing
practical ideas that achieve a public benefit.’
From a policy perspective, social innovation is more of a normative concept.
Policymakers are interested in social innovation for its potential to make a positive
difference to people’s lives.3
Policies and interventions:
Policy as SI
Policy for SI
SI policy as intervention
6. 6
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Evaluating entire programmes and policies
A policy can be evaluated at different levels, from the ‘macro’ to the ‘micro’
level. The appropriate level depends on the policymaker’s needs. There is a
practical trade-off between obtaining robust evidence on the impact of a single
intervention and the concrete policy relevance that a less strict and therefore less
robust methodology might provide for a broader reform. One could first evaluate
the impact of a programme as a whole. The aim of the evaluation is then to
find out whether the programme, including all its components, made a global
difference for its beneficiaries.
Evaluating interventions
At a lower level, it can be interesting to test each intervention separately. By
comparing the impact of each intervention, policymakers can identify the most
effective alternative to address a given policy goal. However, an evaluation testing
different hypothesis may yield more comprehensive results.
Selecting a relevant intervention, programme or policy
It is very important to carefully identify only the few most relevant policy
interventions to be evaluated. For instance, there is limited added value in
evaluating the impact of interventions on a very limited number of people, or in
testing a policy question that is already supported by an extensive solid evidence-
base.
While assessing the potential impact, it is important to keep in mind which
features of the interventions can be reliably tested; this guide is meant to help
with this. Ultimately, the decision to test a programme will rest on two legs: policy
relevance and feasibility.
7. 7
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Step 2: Specifying a ‘theory of change’
A ‘theory of change’ (ToC) is to social innovation
policy formation what plans and foundations are
toabuildingstructure.Thesectionbelowprovides
a fairly succinct description of this approach.
Further information on the most important steps
in a ToC is given in subsequent sections.
A good ToC uses six different building blocks:
1. Needs: is the assessment of the problems faced by the target population.
2. Inputs: are the resources that will be consumed in the implementation of
the intervention. Those include the time spent by the agents implementing
and evaluating the project and the costs involved (i.e. the services and
goods service providers will need to purchase). The critical question is: to
what extent will these resources enable the delivery of the intervention?
3. Outputs: is what will be delivered. It can be information, a subsidy or a
service. The key question here is: how likely is the intervention to produce
the intended short-term outcome?
4. Outcomes: are the results of interest likely to be achieved once the service
has been delivered. Outcomes in the social policy area usually appear in the
medium-term.
A ‘theory of change’ (ToC)
is to social innovation
policy formation what
plans and foundations are
to a building structure.
A map to the desired outcome
The emphasis on design comes from an observation that has been made
countless times by researchers, trainers and advisers: a lot of important questions
in an evaluation remain unanswered or poorly answered due to superficial design.
Whilst there is no such thing as a perfect design, some steps can be taken so that
the energy used in the development and conduct of an impact evaluation get
rewarded as it should. These steps have been integrated into a single framework
known as a ‘theory of change’.
A ToC has been defined as “the description of a sequence of events that is
expected to lead to a particular desired outcome”. It is the causal chain that
connects resources to activities, activities to outputs, outputs to outcomes and
outcomes to impacts.
resources activities outputs outcomes Impacts
8. 8
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
5. Impact: is the change in outcomes that is caused by the intervention being
tested.
6. Finally, a ToC should document the assumptions used to justify the
causal chain. These assumptions need to be supported by research and
stakeholder consultations. This will strengthen the case to be made about
the plausibility of the theory and the likelihood that stated outcomes will
be accomplished.
Figure 1 Theory of Change diagram4
An essential tool in social
innovation public policy creation
There are several advantages in using a ToC.
Firstly, a ToC will help policy makers make
better decisions throughout the entire
lifecycle of the policy. At an early stage, it will
support the formulation of a clear and testable
hypothesis about how change will occur. This
will not only improve accountability, but also
make results more credible because they were
predicted to occur in a certain way. During the
implementation, it can be used as a framework to check milestones and stay on
course, as well as a blueprint for evaluation with measurable indicators of success.
Once the policy is terminated, it can be updated and used to document lessons
learned about what really happened.
4https://datajourney.akvo.org/blog/how-to-design-a-theory-of-change?
6 BUILDING BLOCKS:
Needs
Inputs
Outputs
Outcomes
Impact
Assumptions
9. 9
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Secondly, a ToC is a powerful communication tool to capture the complexity
of an initiative and defend a case to funders, policymakers and boards. The
tough economic context, as well as the intense pressure on governments and
organisations to demonstrate effectiveness, means that leaders are increasingly
selective when it comes to supporting research projects. A visual representation
of the change expected in the system and how it can come about ought to
reassure them as to the credibility of the initiative. It can also keep the process
of implementation and evaluation transparent, so everyone knows what is
happening and why.
The participatory
process - insights from
economics, sociology,
psychology, political
science, etc.
Doing it right
A ToC is the outcome of two parallel and simultaneous processes involving
research and participation. The research process aims to generate the evidence
base underpinning the programme and
to inform its assumptions. Expectations
that a new intervention will lead to the
desired outcome are often justified by our
‘experience’ or ‘common sense’. Inasmuch as
possible, impact evaluations should refrain
from relying on such subjective measures in
that they are highly debatable and do not offer any warranty that the intervention
will succeed. To be truly ‘evidence based’, the causal link between the intervention
and the outcome should rely on social science research. An effective intervention
will require insights from economics, sociology, psychology, political science, etc.
Thus, it is crucial to involve experts very early on in the project.
The participatory process usually includes a series of stakeholder workshops.
The objective is
a. to get feedback on the conclusions and implications of the preliminary
research;
b. to secure stakeholder buy-in, which is an essential success factor.
10. 10
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Step 3: Defining outcomes, outcome indicators and
data collection plans
Impact evaluations test hypotheses regarding the expected outcome of an
intervention. But what are well-defined outcomes? What type of metric should
be used? And when should the outcome be measured? The following section
gives some guidance to make the best decisions.
Inasmuch as possible, one should try and use the same outcome indicators as in
previous evaluations of similar interventions. This includes evaluations conducted
domestically and abroad. Using the same indicator will not only make systematic
reviews and meta-evaluations easier.
We have two other guideline documents that talk about the impact
measurements, so we are kindly inviting you to refer to those two documents.
GUIDELINE #1
Social impact
evaluation and
indicators
GUIDELINE #3
How public authorities
face social impact
measurement?
FROM THE CASE STUDY, P. 18:
Even though social impact is difficult to measure, Mr. Deleja believes the
best way to see their impact is the values that their students have after
leaving school. They also validate former students’ impression of the school
and their time spent there. The social frame that the schools are providing
for students are very important and this is one of the biggest tasks the
school is performing.
Step 4: Estimating the counterfactual
Impact evaluations seek to estimate the intrinsic value of public policies. There are
many reasons why a programme might be perceived as a success even though it
had no actual impact or vice-versa. For example, it could be that the implementa-
tion of the programme coincided with favourable economic conditions, in which
case the situation would have improved even without the new programme. Or,
in two-group comparison, it could be that those who benefited from the new
intervention were somewhat different from those in the control group, artificially
boosting or impeding the intervention.
To take into account effects that have nothing to do with the intervention, impact
evaluations measure its observed outcome against an estimate of what would
have happened in its absence. This estimate is known as the counterfactual.
11. 11
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Individual-level vs. population-level counterfactuals
Whereas some reforms aim to modify the size and composition of the inflow into
a scheme (population-level outcomes), other seek to influence the behaviour of
participants to the scheme (individual-level outcomes). It is very difficult to mea-
sure population-level outcomes of SI and individual-level outcomes of SI simul-
taneously.
To estimate the impact of an SI intervention on individual-level outcomes (e.g.,
labour-market participation, net income, benefit duration), one needs to build
individual-level counterfactuals. Individual-level counterfactuals amount to com-
paring beneficiaries of a new SI intervention with beneficiaries of existing provi-
sions.
Individual-level counterfactuals can also be used to estimate the impact of diffe-
rent aspects of the reform and in this way, to elicit the most cost-effective ones.
This is highly valuable from a policy perspective, as public expenditure can be op-
timised by focusing on the policy options that do have an impact on the desired
outcomes.
In order to estimate the impact of the reform on the inflow into the scheme, one
needs to build population-level counterfactuals. In this case, two similar groups
are compared: one group is given access to the new scheme, whereas the other
continues benefiting from the existing scheme.
Method 1: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
The credibility of an impact evaluation depends on the degree of similarity
between the control and the intervention group, both in terms of observable and
unobservable characteristics. Random assignment to intervention and control
groups constitutes the most reliable method; if the sample is sufficiently large,
it guarantees that the control group has the same characteristics as the group
receiving the programme. RCTs are seen as a rigorous method for constructing a
valid counterfactual.
12. 12
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Figure 2 The basic design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT),
illustrated with a test of a new ʻback to workʼ programme.
p.4, Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled
Trials, Jan. 2012
Method 2: Regression Discontinuity Design
This method can be implemented when there is a clear, quantitative eligibility
criterion or threshold (a cut-off score), that separate a group of people under
intervention from another (control) group. It compares people just above the cut-
off score (who qualify for the new policy or programme), with those just beneath
it (who do not).
This method relies on the assumption that the intervention strictly implements
a clearly quantifiable selection criterion, and that participants are unable to
anticipate and manipulate the scoring close to the cut-off point. The main
weakness of this method is that it measures the effect of the intervention only on
the people lying close to the eligibility threshold. If policymakers are interested
in evaluating the impact of a policy or programme on the entire population, this
method is not appropriate.
Method 3: Differences-in-Differences (DiD)
This method compares the change in outcomes over time among participants
and non-participants. More specifically, it measures the change in outcomes for
the control group to get an idea of what would the ‘natural change’ had been
in the absence of the programme, and tracks the change in outcome for the
Population is split into 2
groups by random lot
Looking for work Found work
Outcomes for both
groups are measured
INTERVENTION
CONTROL
13. 13
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
intervention group to obtain a measure of the ‘natural change’ plus the change
caused by the programme. By subtracting the difference in outcomes from the
control group, to those from the intervention group, the evaluator can obtain a
measure of the change caused by the programme.
Oneoftheadvantagesofthismethodisthatitprovidesameasureoftheimpactfor
thewholepopulationofparticipants,whilecontrollingforchangingenvironmental
conditions. However, it relies on the ‘parallel trends assumption’. That is, in order
to determine that the difference in outcomes is due to the programme, the
trends in outcomes of the participants and of the non-participants should be
approximately the same in the absence of the programme.
Method 4: Statistical Matching
This is a collective term for statistical techniques which construct a control group
by matching each of the participants with one similar non-participant, on the
basis of observed characteristics. The aim is to match participants pairwise with
non-participants using as many variables as possible, to ensure that the sole major
difference between the two groups is the (SI) intervention. The matched non-
participants provide the counterfactual. This method provides an estimate of the
effect of an intervention for all the participants that where successfully matched
to a non-participant, and if there is enough available data, can be applied even
if the programme has already ended. However, this method relies on the strong
and untestable assumption that all relevant background characteristics can be
observed and accounted for.
14. 14
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Step 5: Analysing and interpreting the effect of the
intervention
Impact evaluation methods estimate the impact of an (SI) intervention by com-
paring the results of the intervention and of the control group. The net effect of
an intervention generally amounts to the difference in outcomes in the interven-
tion and in the control group. This chapter presents a general overview of some
important aspects to consider when interpreting results, relevant for all of the
different evaluation methods.
Choosing the time to Measure Outcomes
Certain outcomes can require some time before they fully materialize and beco-
me observable by the researchers. It is of vital importance to choose appropria-
tely the time periods during which different outcomes will be measured. Simi-
larly, and more generally, social innovation policies may require an effort in the
short term to reap benefits in the longer term. While in the short term the policy’s
outcome may be unobservable, upon maturity these become more evident.
FROM THE CASE STUDY, P. 16:
The testing and validation that the school is conducting. Testing is
mostly done internally (internal validation) and between different groups
– students, teachers, management, mostly through questionnaires,
discussions, and interviews. Mr. Deleja stresses that this process is very
important, because until recently some internal actors were afraid to get
real results and real feedback from the students (teachers) or teachers
(management). External validation methods they are using are many, here
we will name a few (refer to p. 16 for more on external validation methods).
Monitoring Compliance, Limiting Attrition and Ensuring
Objectivity
Results may be misleading if some of the units assigned to the control group re-
ceive the programme, and/or some of the units in the intervention group do not.
Partial compliance can potentially reduce the difference in terms of exposure to
the intervention of each group. By monitoring compliance while the interven-
tion is being implemented, researchers can take early action to ensure that com-
pliance rates improve. In addition to this, compliance rates must be rigorously
reported so they can be taken into account in the analysis of results. It is of utmost
importance that an objective and independent third party undertakes the evalua-
tion. The evaluation design and implementation must be carefully reported, and
when possible, data should be made public to enable replications.
15. 15
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Step 6: Disseminating findings
Step 7: From local to global
When the evaluation results have important policy implications, research needs to
be translated into policy. In addition, giving other policy-makers the opportunity
to build on results, be they negative or positive, can further enhance their impact.
Understanding the policy relevance of an evaluation
Policy relevance is very much time-dependent: a topic might be ‘hot’ one day and
‘ice-cold’ the following week. Thus, it is important to keep an eye on the policy
agenda. A ‘window of opportunity’ may arise, for example, in the course of budget
discussions, when policy-makers set up their priorities and allocate resources.
Disseminating results in an accessible format
Beyond the research findings, it is also important to communicate the policy
implications of the policy evaluation/testing. A key responsibility is to make
research more accessible by extracting the most compelling results from longer
papers and reports and presenting them in non-technical language.
How does one know whether a programme that is effective on a pilot scale has
the same impact when scaled up, extended or replicated in a different location?
This is a very important question, and it relates to the external validity of an eva-
luation. External validity, also known as ‘generalizability’, is the degree to which
one can be confident that the results found in a specific context will apply to
other contexts.
There are four major factors that affect the generalizability of an evaluation, in-
cluding the quality of implementation, the scale of implementation, the context
and the content of the programme.
1. The quality of implementation: Pilot programmes are often implemented
with great care, and with well-trained staff. It may be difficult to keep the same
standards at a wider scale. Researchers should implement interventions in repre-
sentative locations with representative partners, and representative samples.
2. The scale of implementation: a programme that is implemented on a small
scale may have different effects when scaled up (general equilibrium effects).
Researchers can adapt the design of the evaluation to capture these effects by
using a wide enough unit of observation.
3. The context of implementation: An intervention that proves to be effective
in one context may have a different impact in another institutional and cultural
context. Behavioural theory can help us define which aspects of the context are
likely to be relevant to a particular programme.
16. 16
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Figure 3 Generalizability
Seven principles of socially innovative policymaking
In this section we talk about the main principles that somehow differentiates
‘regular’ policymaking from socially innovative policymaking. We believe it is an
important aspect of this document, since we do talk about policy as social inno-
vation and policy for social innovation – and there should be evidence that there
are more socially innovative ways to implement policies also.
1. CHALLENGE-FOCUSED
Public authorities are tasked with dealing with some of the thorniest societal
challenges we face: from climate change to poverty. Socially innovative policy-
making seeks to find solutions for these complex challenges using collaborative,
social innovation tools and approaches.
2. OPENNESS
To effectively design and deliver better solutions, socially innovative policymaking
needs to be open to new insights, new methods and approaches, and new forms
of knowledge and expertise.
SAMPLE
POPULATION
Select a sample
from the
population
Generalize
conclusions from
the sample to the
population
17. 17
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
3. HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGN (HCD)
Policymaking is often developed in a public agency with an emphasis on admi-
nistrative rather than user needs. HCD is a process which attempts to invert this
logic, by having policymakers approach a policy challenge with ‘professional em-
pathy’. A number of methods and approaches support the use of HCD in policy.
User research, ethnographic methods, service safaris are just a few of the many
tools available to policymakers.
4. COLLABORATION/CO-DESIGN
Socially innovative policymaking goes a step
beyond consulting users and citizens to mea-
ningfully involve them in the policy process. It
is premised on the belief that policy solutions
will be better if they incorporate the inputs
and ideas provided by citizens and other
stakeholders.
5. EXPERIMENTATION AND EVI-
DENCE
Socially innovative policymaking is ultima-
tely outcomes-focused, and seeks to identify
whether a policy intervention is achieving its
intended goal in a real-world setting. Desi-
gning experimental and evidence-informed
policies enables policymakers to make better decisions, to monitor and evaluate
what is working – and stop what isn’t.
6. ITERATION
Iteration - Socially innovative policies seek to adopt an agile approach to policy
development where policy solutions are continually refined and revisited around
a series of feedback loops. In this sense, an iterative policy development approach
is at odds with traditional ‘waterfall’ or ‘big bang’ policy models - where a top-
down policy strategy is devised and the policy solution is arrived at prescriptively.
7. CONNECTING AND SCALING
Scaling up of policy refers to the expansion,
replication,adaptationandsustainingofeffective
policies, programmes or projects in geographic
space and over time to reach a greater number
of people. Ongoing policy scaling requires
political support, and regular monitoring and
evaluation to assess a policy continues to create
impact as it grows. Embedding and sustaining
change also requires creating synergies with other policies and programmes,
while forging connections and alliances with others affected by or working on
the policy challenge.
Ongoing policy scaling
requires political support,
and regular monitoring
and evaluation to assess a
policy continues to create
impact as it grows.
7 PRINCIPLES OF
SOCIALLY INNOVATIVE
POLICYMAKING:
Challenge-focused
Openness
Human-cantered
design (HCD)
Collaboration/Co-
design
Experimentation and
evidence
Iteration
Connecting and
scaling
18. 5https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/693883. Policy for social innovation: Five ways policy can support social
innovation, Madeleine Gabriel, Nesta
6p42, Social Innovation as a Trigger for Transformation, sept. 2017
Testing new policies is a time and money consuming process, but never the less
a much need one. Way in which it is done vary from sector to sector and territory
to territory. We aim to show the way that is most suitable for creating new social
innovation policies and that means we also view it as a process that needs to be
as inclusive and transformative as possible on multiple levels.
Some parts of the social innovation community have engaged a lot with policy-
makers and have a good idea about how public policy could support them better.
In other areas - for instance, where social innovation networks are less developed
or formalised - there’s been less work done to date.5
Emancipatory transformative SI will have to tackle the challenge of accom-
panying the move towards ‘doing’ with more ‘talking’ in a sense of participation
in decision making process. The notion of bottom-linked governance is an at-
tempt to unify ‘talking’ and ‘doing’. Both academia and policy makers tend to
focus increasingly on the outputs of SI. This tendency has been accompanied by
a decline in interest for the decision-making and government processes in which
the decisions are made – or not made. More emphasis on participation processes
and questions of political representation would benefit the future of social inno-
vation related policies.6
Social Innovation promotes the competitiveness of the EU and its regions which
are well placed to play a leading role in this process. Regional authorities can
orchestrate the process. They can take a lead in promoting and supporting so-
cial innovation, provide funds, bring various stakeholders together, put forward
strategic thinking and support the generation of fresh ideas to overcome societal
and socio-economic challenges.
18
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Conclusion
19. 19
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
In the below text, we
are summarizing the
interview that will be
available in full on our
online platform
(video 4)
We spoke to the principal of local general high school in Slovenia, that is consi-
dered one of the most progressive ones in Slovenia. They are a leader of change
in the school system in Slovenia and the principal Mr. Gregor Deleja is pushing
strongly to change not only the school itself, but also the policies concerning the
education system as a whole. We spoke to him at the school he manages and
tried to obtain information that fits the topic we are discussing in the chapters
above.
Mr. Deleja is one of the most active principles in
the country and the projects his school is invol-
ved in are numerous. We will not name them all,
but focus on the socially innovative ones and the
way they are testing and validating them as well
as implementing them into the existing policies or
creating new ones because of the success of the
innovation.
Mr. Deleja has been the principle of Gimnazija Celje – Center since 2014 and all the
projects and innovations he is implementing started around that time.
Which changes the school is going to implement is a challenging question and
they have a team of students as well as a team of teachers that combine the
views and set the stage for changes that should be good for all involved. Everyone
should keep in mind that creating lasting changes takes time.
The innovations are implemented on both the pedagogical processes as well
as administrative/management level of the school and most of the projects
have both short-term and long long-term goals associated to them. As specified
also above in the theoretical part of the text, the innovations are being imple-
mented in parallel to the traditional process the school is operating in and then
the results are being compared and validated.
Some of the innovative processes currently active at the school are:
1. Digitalisation (pedagogical part and administrative part) of working and
communication processes; data analysis … (also due to Covid-19). There was
no real top down guide lines presented (or late in the process), so the school
needed to come up with their own solutions. Bottom up is still seen as the
way to do social innovation in any sector.
2. Interdisciplinary approach - Flexible forms of transition between school
and the environment for high school students. Working with gifted students
they merge different subject into a few interdisciplinary topics where stu-
dents learn about multiple subjects but focused on one general topic, i.e.
Environment studies, Public speaking, Research work.
CASE STUDY
How is a Local high school in Slovenia (Gimnazija Celje Center) testing
and validating innovative processes and trying to implement changes
in policies and the education system?
20. 20
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
3. Innovative learning environments and experiential learning
4. Strategic planning at several levels (1st, 2nd year; 3rd, 4th year; by pro-
grams, extracurricular activities)
5. Lincoln island initiatives (Skrivnostni otok d.o.o.) - strengthening the or-
ganizational climate and defining a new vision of their school.
This brings us to the testing and validation that the school is conducting. Testing
is mostly done internally (internal validation) and between different groups
– students, teachers, management, mostly through questionnaires, discussions
and interviews. Mr. Deleja stresses that this process is very important, because
until recently some internal actors were afraid to get real results and real feed-
back from the students (teachers) or teachers (management). External valida-
tion methods they are using are many, here we will name a few:
1. The School Barometer is an annual survey that includes several Slove-
nian vocational schools and gymnasiums since 2017, which want to find out
how different stakeholders - students, parents and employees, are satisfied
with the operation of their school. The results of the survey serve as a tool for
school principals and staff to better understand the school community and
its strengths, as well as areas for improvement.
2. Faculty of Economy from University of Ljubljana – has prepared a
strategy document and methodology with which the school can now more
structurally conduct innovation validations.
3. TALIS - The OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey asks teachers
and school leaders about working conditions and learning environments at
their schools to help countries face diverse challenges.
4. PISA – Programme for International Student Assessment is an international
survey on reading, math and science literacy. It is implemented under the
auspices of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD).
5. TIMSS - Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study are pro-
jects of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA). TIMSS research measures trends in student achieve-
ment in mathematics and science by comparing achievement on uniform
knowledge tests of children of approximately the same age who have the
same number of years of schooling behind them. Achievements are ex-
plained by the factors of knowledge acquisition in and out of school, which
are measured by means of questionnaires for students, teachers and school
management.
21. 21
ASIS - Guideline #4 - Testing new social innovation policies on local and regional level (Center Noordung) – June 2020
Even though social impact is difficult to measure, Mr. Deleja believes the best
way to see their impact is the values that their students have after leaving school.
They also validate former students’ impression of the school and their time spent
there. The social frame that the schools are providing for students are very impor-
tant and this is one of the biggest tasks the school is performing.
There is a general idea that all the social innovations and changes the school is
conducting are at some point going to be a trigger of systemic change, that step
by step successfully implemented changes will become official guidelines or new
policies.
What they wish to integrate in the new policies:
1. Intergenerational dialogue – we are trying to integrate a teacher mentor
program, for young teachers to get one of the senior teachers to be their men-
tor for a period of time.
2. Digitalisation
3. Interdisciplinary approach
Still a lot of work and cooperation is needed. As in the process of creating so-
cial innovation, the school is cooperating on local level with multiple stakehol-
ders, i.e. all the high schools from the region, municipality, NGOs, SMEs…, simi-
larly on national level and also on international level with projects like UNESCO
school, ECO school, ERASMUS+, Norway Fund, … This gives them reassurance
that they will be heard and their work will be considered and valued.
At least one of the initiatives has been accepted as new policy and it is the
work being done with gifted students on the interdisciplinary approach – na-
mely, interdisciplinary subjects have been integrated into schools as optional
subject. As said before, the changes are a long-term process and to use the
words of Mr. Deleja ‘we sometimes need to work for future generations and be
aware that we might not see the final result during our lifetime.’