This work investigates decisions related to the evaluation of the results of public policy as it relates to knowledge creation. Gaps related to results evaluations are sources of problems in the implementation of public policy (Ramos & Schabbach, 2012; Bovaird, 2014; Mastenbroek, Voorst, & Meuwese, 2015). Part of the literature concerning public policy tends to focus on processes and products, with there being few studies that evaluate results (Mark & Henry, 2004; Hill & Hupe, 2005; Anderson, 2008; Robichau & Lynn, 2009; Laurian et al., 2010; Bovaird, 2014).
Despite its relevance in terms of state planning (Ramos & Schabbach, 2012), few studies relate policy objectives, specificity and evaluations (Rich, 1997; Champagne, 1999). Policy related to knowledge creation faces difficulties in being able to show cause and effect in its results, because it involves the use of generated knowledge that is complex and cannot be simplified (Bovaird, 2014).
The research question which orients this investigation is: what explains the decision to not include results evaluations for the Research Program of the Unified Health System (PPSUS)? This research is qualitative and analyzes the evaluation of the results of the PPSUS, seeking to explain the relationships among the institutions, inter-organizational coordination, program specificity and results evaluations.
In the case studied, the nature of the program’s institutions was not demonstrated to be an element associated with the adoption of results evaluations, because there was no evidence found for this finding. The elements that better explain the absence of results evaluations for the PPSUS were identified using organizational and specificity approaches.
The organizational approach explored the influence exercised by health sector managers on the dynamics of the program’s inter-organizational relationships. The lack of interest on the part of health managers in terms of program results helps us understand why there was no evaluation of results made by the decision makers of the PPSUS, who also are its primary users and target audience, which makes this a case study of incoherence and a distancing from policy objectives (Johnson, 1998; Arretche, 2000).
The contribution of the specificity approach was its pointing to the lack of clarity and difficulty in measuring the objectives of the PPSUS (Ingraham, 1987; Hanberger, 2011; Howlett, 2014). The difficulties related to the identification of program objectives are associated with the low esteem that the health managers displayed for scientific knowledge in their decision making process. Hansen, Klejnstrup and Andersen (2013) have shown a connection between difficulties in making explicit the variables to be evaluated to the contexts of developing countries, and argue that this has to do with cultural factors. These are, therefore, difficulties that can be overcome by using variables that are appropriate for the given policy, which will result in the recovery of the relevance of operational aspects in the conduction of results evaluations, as long as they are indeed included in the policy managers’ decision making process.
F2 - Connecting Public Management Researcher and Practitioners for Improved Outcomes (Spec
