In a recent webinar, we explored how developmental evaluation was used across two Health Foundation–funded programmes: Shaping Places for Healthier Lives (SPHL England) and Tech for Better Care (T4BC). In this blog, we revisit key insights from that discussion and reflect on how developmental evaluation can be adapted to different contexts where learning, flexibility and change are essential.
Authors: Hardeep Aiden, Diane Redfern-Tofts, Joanna Scott, Joshua Butt, Ross Goldstone
Our recent webinar[1] explored the lessons we took from commissioning and implementing developmental evaluations for two separate programmes funded by the Health Foundation:
- Shaping Places for Healthier Lives (SPHL England)[2], where developmental evaluation was applied to support systems change in local authorities, and
- Tech for Better Care (T4BC), where developmental evaluation has been integral to the formation of the national programme.[3]
Here, we take a deeper dive into some of the issues we covered in that webinar and address some of the questions raised by the audience, exploring how developmental evaluation can be adapted for different contexts and pathways.
What is the developmental evaluation approach?
Developmental evaluation involves asking evaluative questions, applying evaluation logic and reporting evaluative data to inform the development of change initiatives. This often includes innovative programmes, projects, products, organisations and/or systems change in complex, dynamic environments.[4]
Developmental evaluations align with the UK Government’s Magenta Book framework,[5] where the approach is recognised as one enabling a systematic assessment of a programme or intervention while allowing flexibility in the evaluation design.
Unlike formative or summative evaluations, which assess outcomes at fixed points, developmental evaluations emphasise real-time feedback, enabling programmes to pivot as contexts and evaluation needs change. Of course, developmental evaluation is not the only approach evaluators can consider. For example, many features align closely with the Problem-Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA) approach, which advocates experimentation and tight feedback loops; and like realist evaluations, developmental evaluations are also concerned with context. Realist approaches seek to explain ‘what works for whom and why’, while developmental evaluations focus on adapting change initiatives to changing environments.
Developmental evaluations demand high engagement from programme teams. Unlike traditional evaluations, developmental evaluations embed evaluators within delivery teams to co-create learning processes. This demands openness to change, frequent reflection sessions and a willingness to act on emerging insights. While resource-intensive, this involvement pays dividends in adaptability and relevance, particularly for programmes operating in complex, dynamic environments. Ensuring quality in developmental evaluations hinges on clarity of purpose and flexibility, using tools such as transparent briefs that articulate adaptive goals rather than rigid deliverables.
Applying developmental evaluation principles to programme evaluations
The Health Foundation used the developmental evaluation approach for the first time when evaluating two funded programmes: SPHL England and T4BC. It was deemed to be the right approach because both programmes comprised complex interventions involving multiple stakeholders and uncertain pathways, while real-time learning and adaptation was essential.
Developmental evaluation can be viewed as a set of principles for approaching evaluation rather than a prescribed approach. In practice, it is up to funders, programme teams and evaluators to come together to discuss the practicalities of carrying out a developmental evaluation and deciding where to make compromises.
The T4BC programme evaluation explored the Foundation’s role in funding innovation and informed developments in the programme at a national level. The evaluation partner used contribution analysis to structure the exploration of the programme theory of change and held regular programme meetings to collaboratively explore and apply learning to the ongoing programme delivery.
The developmental evaluation of the SPHL England programme was designed to support systems change focused on addressing a range of public health concerns. This programme enabled five local authority led partnerships to develop complex systems change approaches, as they learnt more about how different interventions and activities played out in their local area. The evaluation partner worked closely with the programme team and the five project teams but was not fully embedded in either. This was a pragmatic choice in terms of cost, but also a strategic decision, as the idea of embedding evaluators in programme/project teams may be perceived as a threat to the evaluators’ independence.
Communicating the value of developmental evaluations relies on reframing evaluation as a learning partnership rather than a compliance exercise. The T4BC programme team, for example, aimed to create a learning-positive culture both with the funded teams and internal stakeholders through regular meetings to explore and test emerging learning. This was deemed to be important for centring the evaluation’s learning focus. For the SPHL England programme, a decision was taken to relabel the evaluation, which was coming across as an assessment of the project teams, as the ‘learning and research’ aspect of the programme. Practices like this help build trust and increase the likelihood that the findings will inform decision-making.
You do not necessarily need a large team or learn a whole new swathe of research methods to be able to carry out a developmental evaluation. The tools and techniques needed for a developmental evaluation are likely to be the same, with more emphasis on living documents for project management, visual mapping tools (e.g. theory of change diagrams or systems maps) and regular feedback cycles using collaboration platforms.
These examples illustrate good practice: embedding evaluation within programme teams, prioritising feedback loops and using flexible evaluation designs that evolve alongside interventions.
Developmental evaluation as a mindset shift
Developmental evaluations represent a shift in how we understand and measure success in complex systems. By embedding evaluators in programme teams (where possible), fostering stakeholder collaboration and embracing learning, developmental evaluations transform evaluation from a retrospective judgment into a forward-looking learning process.
Developmental evaluations offer not just an approach, but a mindset shift that values adaptability, inclusivity and continuous improvement. For practitioners navigating uncertainty, this change in mindset can lead to better programme or intervention design. By embedding evaluation into policy design and delivery, developmental evaluations could help policymakers respond to emergent challenges using rigorous evidence without sacrificing accountability.
[1] Available via the UK Evaluation Society Members’ Hub: https://app.sheepcrm.com/evaluation/login
[2] https://www.health.org.uk/funding-and-partnerships/programmes/shaping-places-for-healthier-lives#England
[3] https://www.health.org.uk/funding-and-partnerships/programmes/tech-for-better-care
[4] Patton, Michael Quinn, ‘Developmental evaluation designs and methods’, in Anu Rangarajan (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Program Design and Implementation Evaluation (2023; Oxford Academic). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190059668.013.6
[5] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-magenta-book
Our thanks to the authors of this blog for generously sharing their time, insight and practical experience from the Shaping Places for Healthier Lives (SPHL England) and Tech for Better Care (T4BC) programmes. Their reflections help bring developmental evaluation to life and deepen understanding of how it can support learning and adaptation in complex settings.