Foundations play an important role in modern societies, but not much is known about the quality and outcomes of the many diverse activities they support. There is an increasing interest in evaluation policy as a systematic approach to evaluation in foundations. We study the extent to which foundations in Denmark publish an explicit evaluation policy, as well as their requirements on grantees and the evaluative information that foundations offer back to stakeholders and society. Based on a systematic study of the websites of a representative sample of 20 foundations, we find that only three have explicit evaluation policies, and they are not very comprehensive. The majority of foundations do not engage in evaluation, and many do not provide any substantial evaluative information on their website. We offer the extraction/public provision ratio (EPPR) as a conceptual device for further studies. We also discuss barriers and potential improvements in foundations’ engagement with evaluation policy.
Al HudibHCousinsJB (2021) Understanding evaluation policy and organizational capacity for evaluation: An interview study. American Journal of Evaluation43(2): 234–54.
2.
Al HudibHCousinsJB (2022) Evaluation policy and organizational evaluation capacity building: A study of international aid agency evaluation policies. New Directions for Evaluation173(Spring): 29–48.
3.
BeckU (1992) Risk Society–Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
4.
BenjaminL (2021) Beyond programs: Toward a fuller picture of beneficiaries in non-profit evaluation. In: Dahler-LarsenP (ed.) A Research Agenda for Evaluation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 81–104.
5.
BrestP (2012) A decade of outcome-oriented philanthropy. Stanford Social Innovation Review10(2): 42–7.
6.
ChelimskyE (2006) The purposes of evaluation in a democratic society. In: ShawIGreeneJCMarkMM (eds) The Sage Handbook of Evaluation. London: Sage, 33–55.
7.
ChristieCALemireST (2019) Why evaluation theory should be used to inform evaluation policy. American Journal of Evaluation40(4): 490–508.
8.
CoffmanJBeerTPatrizeP, et al. (2013) Benchmarking evaluation in foundations: Do we know what we are doing?The Foundation Review5(2): 36–51.
9.
CousinsBJEarlLM (1995) Participatory Evaluation in Education: Studies in Evaluation Use and Organizational Learning. London: Routledge-Falmer.
10.
Dahler-LarsenP (2023) Evaluating evaluation policy in the X foundation. The Foundation Review15(1): 33–43.
11.
DeweyJ (2017 [1927]) Offentligheden og dens problemer [The Public and Its Problems]. København: Hans Reitzel.
12.
DillmannLChristieCA (2017) Evaluation policy in a nonprofit foundation: A case study exploration of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. American Journal of Evaluation38(1): 60–79.
13.
DiMaggioPPowellW (eds) (1991) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14.
EbrahimA (2019) Measuring Social Change. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.
15.
GibbonsMLimogesCNowotnyH, et al. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.
16.
HartNRMarkMM (2022) Evaluation policy: An introduction. New Directions for Evaluation173(Spring): 9–16.
17.
HasenfeldY (1983) Human Service Organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
18.
KinarskyARChristieCA (2021) Analysis of evaluation policies in the philanthropic sector. American Journal of Evaluation43(2): 175–92.
19.
KramerMRBickelWE (2004) Foundations and evaluation as uneasy partners in learning. In: BravermanMTConstantineNASlaterJK (eds) Foundations and Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 51–75.
20.
LaurettRFerreiraJJ (2018) Strategy in nonprofit organisations: A systematic literature review and agenda for future research. Voluntas29: 881–97.
21.
LevitonLCBassME (2004) Using evaluation to advance a foundation’s mission. In: BravermanMTConstantineNASlaterJK (eds) Foundations and Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 3–26.
22.
MarkMMBeeryWL (2004) Making judgments about what to evaluation and how intensely. In: BravermanMTConstantineNASlaterJK (eds) Foundations and Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 145–65.
23.
MarkMMCooksyLJTrochimWMK (2009) Evaluation policy: An introduction and overview. New Directions for Evaluation: Evaluation Policy and Evaluation Practice123: 3–11.
24.
MarwellNPMosleyJE (2025) Mismeasuring Impact. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
25.
MeyerJRowanB (1991) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth an ceremony. In: DiMaggioPPowellW (eds) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 41–62.
26.
PreskillHTorresR (2000) The learning dimension of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation88(Winter): 25–38.
27.
ReckwitzA (2019 [2017]) Singulariteternes samfund [Die Gesellschaft der Singularitäten]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.
28.
RoyO (2024) The Crisis of Culture. London: C. Hurst & Co.
29.
ScheinE (2010) Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30.
StehrN (2001) The Fragility of Modern Societies–Knowledge and Risk in the Information Age. London: Sage.
31.
SternEStameNMayneJ, et al. (2012) Broadening the range of designs and methods for impact evaluations. Report of a study commissioned by the Department for International Development. Working paper no. 38. London: Department for International Development.
32.
StrawRBHerrellJN (2002) A framework for understanding and improving multisite evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation94(Summer): 5–15.
33.
TrochimWMK (2009) Evaluation policy and evaluation practice. New Directions for Evaluation123(Fall): 13–32.
34.
WeissCH (1977) Research for policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis3: 531–45.
