Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Whaley, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Whaley, A. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 30, No. 6, 803-816 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X06288737

An Objective Rating Form to Evaluate Grant Proposals to the Hogg Foundation for Mental Health

A Pilot Study of Implementation

Arthur L. Whaley

Russell Sage Foundation and Hogg Foundation for Mental Health University of Texas at Austin

The lack of support for mental health–related projects by private philanthropy, even among those that express an interest in mental health, is due in large part to the subjectivity of the grant review process. To address this problem, Whaley, Rodriguez, and Alexander developed the Grant Proposal Rating Form (GPRF) to make the grant review process more objective at the Hogg Foundation for Mental Health. The purpose of the current study is to establish the ecological validity of the GPRF by a pilot study of its implementation in the actual grant review process of the foundation. The overall results of this pilot study did not yield consistently favorable psychometric outcomes as the original study by Whaley et al. The implications of these results are discussed.

Key Words: grant review • mental health • philanthropy • rating form • reliability • validity


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?