Historically, individuals with a disability have been underrepresented in evaluations of services and programs that aim to serve them. This underrepresentation is due to a number of challenges including time constraints, communication impairments and power relationships. In many evaluations, proxies are used to collect data and information about the life of the individual living with a disability. How then, do we provide an evaluation of a program or service if those who it aims to serve are not directly involved in the data collection process as a participant? This article describes the pilot of a participatory evaluation method (Photovoice) in the evaluation of a disability service, which provides respite weekends for families of children with a disability. The method was implemented with participants living with a disability who attended the second program weekend in 2015. The article discusses the Photovoice method that was implemented, the findings of the pilot and lessons learned by the evaluators.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AldridgeJ. (2007). Picture this: the use of participatory photographic research methods with people with learning disabilities.Disability and Society, 22(1), pp. 1–17.
2.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2008). Disability in Australia: trends in prevalence, education, employment and community living (Cat. no. AUS 103). Canberra: AIHW. Retrieved from http://aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=6442468143
3.
BernardK. (2013). When a child has a disability: exploring experience of young siblings through photovoice (Occupational Therapy Doctorate, University of Toledo, USA). Retrieved from http://utdr.utoledo.edu/graduate-projects/508/
4.
BoothT., & BoothW. (2003). In the frame: Photovoice and mothers with learning difficulties.Disability and Society, 18(4), pp. 431–442.
5.
CarnahanC. R. (2006). Photovoice: engaging children with autism and their teachers.Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(2), pp. 44–50.
6.
CousinsJ. B. (2003). Utilization effects of participatory evaluation. In KellaghanT., & StufflebeamD. L. (Eds.), International Handbook of Educational Evaluation (vol. 9, pp. 245–265). Netherlands: Springer.
7.
FournierB., BridgeA., Pritchard KennedyA., AlibhaiA., & Konde-LuleJ. (2014). Hear our voices: a Photovoice project with children who are orphaned and living with HIV in a Ugandan group home.Children and Youth Services Review, 45, pp. 55–63. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.03.038
8.
GuerraS. R., RodriguesS. P., DemainS., FigueiredoD. M., & SousaL. X. (2013). Evaluating proFamilies-dementia: adopting Photovoice to capture clinical significance.Dementia, 12(5), pp. 569–587. doi: 10.1177/1471301212437779
9.
JurkowskiJ., & Paul-WardA. (2007). Photovoive with vulnerable populations: adressing disparaties in health promotion among people with intellectual disabilites.Health Promotion Practice, 8(4), pp. 358–365.
10.
KramerL., ShwartzP., CheadleA., & RauzonS. (2013). Using Photovoice as a participatory evaluation tool in Kaiser Permanentes Community Health Initiative.Society for Public Health Education, 14(5), pp. 686–694.
11.
LennieJ. (2006). Increasing the rigour and trustworthiness of participatory evaluations: learnings from the field.Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 6(1), pp. 27–35.
12.
LongT., & JohnsonM. (2000). Rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research.Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing, 4(1), pp. 30–37. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1054/cein.2000.0106
13.
MertensD. M. (1999). Inclusive evaluation: implications of transformative theory for evaluation.American Journal of Evaluation, 20(1), pp. 1–14. doi: 10.1177/109821409902000102
14.
MertensD., FarleyJ., MadisonA.-M., & SingletonP. (1994). Diverse voices in evaluation practice: feminists, minorities, and persons with disabilities.Evaluation Practice, 15(2), pp. 123–129. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0886-1633(94)90003-5
15.
MontgomeryP., ForchukC., DuncanC., RoseD., BaileyP. H., & VeluriR. (2008). Supported housing programs for persons with serious mental illness in rural northern communities: a mixed method evaluation.BMC Health Services Research, 8, pp. 156–156. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-156
16.
O'GradyL. (2008). The world of adolescence: using Photovoice to explore psychological sense of community and wellbeing in adolescents with and without an intellectual disability (Thesis, Doctor of Applied Psychology [community], Victoria University, Australia). Retrieved from vuir.vu.edu.au/1575/1/OGrady.pdf
17.
OttmannG., & CrosbieJ. (2013). Mixed methods approaches in open-ended qualitative, exploratory research involving people with learning disabilities: a comparative methods study.Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 17(3), pp. 182–197.
18.
RobinsonS., FisherK. R., & StrikeR. (2014). Participatory and inclusive approaches to disability program evaluation.Australian Social Work, 67(4), pp. 495–508. doi: 10.1080/0312407X.2014.902979
19.
RyanK. (1998). Advantages and challenges of using inclusive evaluation approaches in evaluation practice.American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), p. 101.
20.
SandsC., HarperK., ReedL. E., & SharM. (2009). A Photovoice participatory evaluation of a school gardening program through the eyes of fifth graders.Practicing Anthropology, 31(4), pp. 15–20.
21.
SchalockR. L., BonhamG. S., & VerdugoM. A. (2008). The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities.Evaluation and Program Planning, 31(2), pp. 181–190. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.02.001
22.
SchleienS., BrakeL., MillerK., & WaltomG. (2013). Using Photovoice to listen to adults with intellectual disabilities on being part of the community.Annals of Leisure Research, 16(3), pp. 212–229.
23.
TetiM., MurrayC., JohnsonL., & BinsonD. (2012). Photovoice as a community-based participatory research method among women living with HIV/AIDS: ethical opportunities and challenges.Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 7(4), pp. 34–43. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.4.34
24.
VaughnL. M., ForbesJ. R., & HowellB. (2009). Enhancing home visitation programs: input from a participatory evaluation using Photovoice.Infants & Young Children, 22(2), pp. 132–145. doi: 10.s1097/01.iyc.0000348054.10551.66
25.
WangC., & BurrisM. A. (1997). Photovoice: concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment.Health Education and Behaviour, 24(3), pp. 369–387.
26.
WangC., CashJ., & PowersL. (2000). Who knows the streets as well as the homeless? Promoting personal and community action through Photovoice.Health Promotion Practice, 1(1), pp. 81–89.
