The Long-Term impact of Business Support? - Exploring the Role of Evaluation Timing using Micro Data

The original contribution of this work is threefold. Firstly, this thesis develops a critical perspective on current evaluation practice of business support, with focus on the timing of evaluation. The general time frame applied for business support policy evaluation is limited to one to two, seldom three years post intervention. This is despite calls for long-term impact studies by various authors, concerned about time lags before effects are fully realised. This desire for long-term evaluation opposes the requirements by policy-makers and funders, seeking quick results. Also, current ‘best practice’ frameworks do not refer to timing or its implications, and data availability affects the ability to undertake long-term evaluation. Secondly, this thesis provides methodological value for follow-up and similar studies by using data linking of scheme-beneficiary data with official performance datasets. Thus data availability problems are avoided through the use of secondary data. Thirdly, this thesis builds the evidence, through the application of a longitudinal impact study of small business support in England, covering seven years of post intervention data. This illustrates the variability of results for different evaluation periods, and the value in using multiple years of data for a robust understanding of support impact. For survival, impact of assistance is found to be immediate, but limited. Concerning growth, significant impact centres on a two to three year period post intervention for the linear selection and quantile regression models – positive for employment and turnover, negative for productivity. Attribution of impact may present a problem for subsequent periods. The results clearly support the argument for the use of longitudinal data and analysis, and a greater appreciation by evaluators of the factor time. This analysis recommends a time frame of four to five years post intervention for soft business support evaluation.

The long-term impact of business support? - Exploring the role of evaluation timing using micro data

The original contribution of this work is threefold. Firstly, this thesis develops a critical perspective on current evaluation practice of business support, with focus on the timing of evaluation. The general time frame applied for business support policy evaluation is limited to one to two, seldom three years post intervention. This is despite calls for long-term impact studies by various authors, concerned about time lags before effects are fully realised. This desire for long-term evaluation opposes the requirements by policy-makers and funders, seeking quick results. Also, current ‘best practice’ frameworks do not refer to timing or its implications, and data availability affects the ability to undertake long-term evaluation. Secondly, this thesis provides methodological value for follow-up and similar studies by using data linking of scheme-beneficiary data with official performance datasets. Thus data availability problems are avoided through the use of secondary data. Thirdly, this thesis builds the evidence, through the application of a longitudinal impact study of small business support in England, covering seven years of post intervention data. This illustrates the variability of results for different evaluation periods, and the value in using multiple years of data for a robust understanding of support impact. For survival, impact of assistance is found to be immediate, but limited. Concerning growth, significant impact centres on a two to three year period post intervention for the linear selection and quantile regression models – positive for employment and turnover, negative for productivity. Attribution of impact may present a problem for subsequent periods. The results clearly support the argument for the use of longitudinal data and analysis, and a greater appreciation by evaluators of the factor time. This analysis recommends a time frame of four to five years post intervention for soft business support evaluation.

Usual medical treatments or levonorgestrel-IUS for women with heavy menstrual bleeding:long-term randomised pragmatic trial in primary care

Background: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common, chronic problem affecting women and health services. However, long-term evidence on treatment in primary care is lacking. Aim: To assess the effectiveness of commencing the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or usual medical treatments for women presenting with HMB in general practice. Design and setting: A pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, open-label, long term, randomised controlled trial in 63 primary care practices across the English Midlands. Method: In total, 571 women aged 25–50 years, with HMB were randomised to LNG-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic/mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen–progestogen, or progesterone alone). The primary outcome was the patient reported Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS, measuring effect of HMB on practical difficulties, social life, psychological and physical health, and work and family life; scores from 0 to 100). Secondary outcomes included surgical intervention (endometrial ablation/hysterectomy), general quality of life, sexual activity, and safety. Results: At 5 years post-randomisation, 424 (74%) women provided data. While the difference between LNG-IUS and usual treatment groups was not significant (3.9 points; 95% confidence interval = −0.6 to 8.3; P = 0.09), MMAS scores improved significantly in both groups from baseline (mean increase, 44.9 and 43.4 points, respectively; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Rates of surgical intervention were low in both groups (surgery-free survival was 80% and 77%; hazard ratio 0.90; 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.31; P = 0.6). There was no difference in generic quality of life, sexual activity scores, or serious adverse events. Conclusion: Large improvements in symptom relief across both groups show treatment for HMB can be successfully initiated with long-term benefit and with only modest need for surgery.