This paper from Michael Quinn Patton presents a retrospective case study in which the the potential influence of judicial advocacy efforts targeted at the Supreme Court is assessed.
The intervention’s impact was evaluated using evidence gathered through fieldwork (interviews, document analysis, detailed review of the Court arguments and decision, news analysis, and the documentation of the campaign itself), aiming at eliminating alternative or rival explanations until the most valid explanation remained (i.e. using forensic option or “modus operandi” approach). Patton believes that advocacy evaluation should be utilisation-focused. That means focusing the evaluation on intended use by intended users, and evaluating the evaluation by that standard.
- First, Do No Harm
- GEM Case Study Option
The Case Study as Evaluation Evidence
A Model for Effective Judicial Influence
Integrated Systems Theory of Change
Figure 6. Judicial influence theory of change
Patton, M. Q. (2008). Advocacy impact evaluation. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 5(9), 1-10. Retrieved from http://www.calendow.org/uploadedFiles/Evaluation/Patton%20Advocacy%20Impact%20Evaluation.pdf?n=4310