ScholarGate
Assistant
Process / pipelineProgram evaluation methodology

Process Evaluation

Process evaluation examines how a program or policy was actually implemented, rather than only whether it achieved its outcomes. It documents what was delivered, to whom, how much, how well and in what context, so that outcome findings can be interpreted correctly. By assessing implementation fidelity, dose, reach, and the mechanisms and contextual factors at work, process evaluation explains why an intervention succeeded or failed and distinguishes a flawed program theory from a sound theory that was poorly delivered. The UK Medical Research Council's 2015 guidance and earlier health-promotion frameworks consolidated it as a core component of evaluating complex interventions.

Open in MethodMindSoonApply, compare, get guidance
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore
VideoSoon

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Sources

  1. Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., et al. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 350, h1258. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h1258
  2. Saunders, R. P., Evans, M. H., & Joshi, P. (2005). Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: A how-to guide. Health Promotion Practice, 6(2), 134–147. DOI: 10.1177/1524839904273387

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 22). Process Evaluation of Program Implementation. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/public-policy/process-evaluation

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

Compare side by side

Referenced by

ScholarGateProcess Evaluation (Process Evaluation of Program Implementation). Retrieved 2026-06-24 from https://scholargate.app/en/public-policy/process-evaluation · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026