This paper critically examines the feminist program evaluation framework as described by Beardsley and Miller (2002), exploring its three foundational principles: stakeholder cooperation, non-hierarchical team structure, and a feminist ideological lens. Drawing on the case study of a substance abuse program serving women, the paper highlights the model's strengths in fostering collaboration and surfacing overlooked program deficits. It also identifies key limitations, including the difficulty of replicating shared ideological consensus across diverse settings, the potential for lower-ranking members to self-censor, and the challenge of applying feminist poststructuralist assumptions within the practical, financially driven realities of social service organizations.
According to Rebecca M. Beardsley and Michelle Hughes Miller's 2002 article "Revisioning the Process: A Case Study in Feminist Program Evaluation," feminist program evaluations are based upon three core principles. The first principle is cooperation — namely, that all relevant stakeholders must be considered when setting the standards for evaluation, not simply the program designers. The second is a principle of non-hierarchy: all evaluation team members are regarded as equal partners. Thirdly, the program must be evaluated from the ideological perspective of feminism.
Although this final standard might seem unrealistic in anything but a woman-oriented program — such as the substance abuse program targeting females discussed in the article — Beardsley and Miller point out that the majority of consumers of social services are female. The authors argue that a collaborative program evaluation process is therefore well-suited to the disproportionately female composition of the social work profession.
"In fourth-generation evaluation, the evaluator shifts from an authoritarian technical expert to a facilitator of a collaborative effort between the agency staff, the evaluator, and other stakeholders" (Beardsley & Miller, 2002, p. 59). All voices are valued during the early phases of the programming process. Members get to know one another and exchange ideas rather than reinforce social hierarchies. The metaphor used for bringing forth a new program is a "birthing" process. Decisions are arrived at through consensus rather than through top-down decision-making. Those individuals in higher positions of authority are asked to "leave their positions at the door" during team meetings (Beardsley & Miller, 2002, p. 62). Cooperation between group members is the overarching goal.
"Benefits of collaboration and shared feminist ideology"
"Self-censorship, ideological limits, and financial realities"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.