Методический аудит независимой оценки качества в социальной сфере:возможности и ограничения
The independent evaluation of quality (IEQ) of social institutions is relatively new tool in the public administration, which has acquired institutional, legislatively regulated practices in recent years (2013–2015). The review of evaluation definitions is presented, and it this context, the scope and limitations of IEQ are fixed. First, the IEQ consider just the evaluation of conditions and resources of social programs, but not the products, effects or impact. Second, indicators and criteria for evaluation are determined in advanced and legally regulated. And third, IEQ is focused on summative rating of organizations, or on the using of linear model of measurement. To overcome these constraints, the inclusion of additional data collection methods could be implemented to gain more holistically evaluation of the conditions and resources of the organization. The article explores the methodical audit of IEQ — the relevance of chosen techniques of data gathering and the construction of rating scales. The empirical basis is the experience gained in the application of the IEQ methodology for rating of 28 Centers of social assistance to families and children located in Moscow. The strategy of mixed methods research (MMR) and in particular the design of additional covering (Morgan 2014) allowed gathering diverse data, comparing and integrating them that was described in detail method by methods. The examples how to combine standardized and participative observation, visual data and field notes, formalized survey and “interviews with interviewers” are presented. The indicators and scales for rating constrictions and their interpretation are discussed in the second part of article. The necessity for normalization and weighting of chosen indicators is debating. In conclusion summarizes the main findings about the public role of IEQ, and its importance for changes management in social institutions, public administration in a whole, and for service beneficiaries.