Method for the evaluation of social projects

This instrument was part of the research project "Research on Evaluation of Health and Education Plans and Programs in the Province of Buenos Aires", developed by the of Chair Preventive Psychology of the Psychology course of studies at the School of Humanities and Educational Sciences, National Univer- sity of La Plata (Argentina). The basis for proposing an assessment instrument is the need for a method enabling analysis, systematization of knowledge and the assignment of values distributed into scales and organized in general charts, on social programs. Its main concern is the analysis of health and education programs and projects, restricted to certain specific areas or regions, in search for theoretic trustworthi-ness, methodological accuracy as well as pragmatic operability. This is the result of four years of researching said programs at system, service and community levels.

Method for the evaluation of social projects

This instrument was part of the research project "Research on Evaluation of Health and Education Plans and Programs in the Province of Buenos Aires", developed by the of Chair Preventive Psychology of the Psychology course of studies at the School of Humanities and Educational Sciences, National Univer- sity of La Plata (Argentina). The basis for proposing an assessment instrument is the need for a method enabling analysis, systematization of knowledge and the assignment of values distributed into scales and organized in general charts, on social programs. Its main concern is the analysis of health and education programs and projects, restricted to certain specific areas or regions, in search for theoretic trustworthi-ness, methodological accuracy as well as pragmatic operability. This is the result of four years of researching said programs at system, service and community levels.

Social Housing in Great Metropolitan Areas: A New Methodology for Integrated Quality Evaluation and Comparison.

Este artículo expone la primera aplicación experimental de un método para el análisis y la comparación de experiencias de vivienda social internacional en el contexto de las grandes áreas metropolitanas. El método, desarrollado en la Universidad Politécnica Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) desde 2009, se basa en la utilización de códigos gráficos y numéricos comunes y la integración de diferentes escalas de aproximación al entorno construido, de la vivienda y su arquitectura, a sus materiales de construcción y llegando más lejos, la ciudad. Además, los datos están vinculados a tres conceptos clave estrechamente relacionados con las condiciones específicas de las grandes áreas metropolitanas: la economía, la densidad y la diversidad. El objetivo final de la investigación es proporcionar una herramienta para la evaluación de la calidad de las viviendas sociales, optimización de recursos y un diseño innovador.

Sources of selection bias in evaluating social programs: An interpretation of conventional measures and evidence on the effectiveness of matching as a program evaluation method

This paper decomposes the conventional measure of selection bias in observational studies into three components. The first two components are due to differences in the distributions of characteristics between participant and nonparticipant (comparison) group members: the first arises from differences in the supports, and the second from differences in densities over the region of common support. The third component arises from selection bias precisely defined. Using data from a recent social experiment, we find that the component due to selection bias, precisely defined, is smaller than the first two components. However, selection bias still represents a substantial fraction of the experimental impact estimate. The empirical performance of matching methods of program evaluation is also examined. We find that matching based on the propensity score eliminates some but not all of the measured selection bias, with the remaining bias still a substantial fraction of the estimated impact. We find that the support of the distribution of propensity scores for the comparison group is typically only a small portion of the support for the participant group. For values outside the common support, it is impossible to reliably estimate the effect of program participation using matching methods. If the impact of participation depends on the propensity score, as we find in our data, the failure of the common support condition severely limits matching compared with random assignment as an evaluation estimator.