Advocacy evaluation, also called ''public policy advocacy design, monitoring, and evaluation,'' evaluates the progress or outcomes of advocacy, such as changes in public policy. This is different from policy analysis, which generally looks at the results of the policy, or mainstream program evaluation, which assesses whether programs or direct services have been successful. Advocacy strives to influence a program or policy either directly or indirectly; therefore, the influence is being evaluated, rather than the results of that influence. Advocacy evaluators seek to understand the extent to which advocacy efforts have contributed to the advancement of a goal or policy. They do this in order to learn what works, what does not, and what works better in order to achieve advocacy goals and improve future efforts.
==Goals of advocacy (dependent variables)==
In order to evaluate something, one must know the goals of the program/activity, in this case - advocacy efforts. Policy advocacy evaluation focuses on the contribution towards achieving policy, and not on the results of that policy. Policy advocacy evaluators look at these dependent variables (many of which interrelate significantly with movement in the policy cycle):
Intermediate Goal Examples:
* Increased awareness of constituents about the need for policy (Problem Identification -> Agenda Setting)
* Change in rate of key-words use by politicians, sometimes starting from 0 (Problem Identification -> Agenda Setting)
* Increase in ratio of policy being implemented according to the adopted legislation (Adoption->Implementation)
* Developed capacity of advocacy actor or network of actors to conduct advocacy efforts
* Policy change itself in the desired direction (of the policy cycle). This is the highest level intermediate outcome, and as an inherent best practice, is the goal of most policy advocacy efforts. Policy Advocacy works to move a policy through the policy cycle.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』