Abstract
Using the case of the Prince's Trust, the preeminent UK youth enterprise programme, I investigate how different evaluation methodologies generate radically different evidence of the impact of the programme. The key result is that simpler forms of evaluation tend to provide positive support for this programme, whereas more sophisticated evaluations are not so positive. I discuss the implications of this for the way stakeholders should view evaluations. I urge caution about the claims made for programmes that receive only lighter forms of evaluation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
