1

Research carried out by New Philanthropy capital (NPC, 2011)

http://www.artsalliance.org.uk/unlockingvalue

http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/noms/commissioning

Appendix 1: Quality assessment criteria:

The tender application must demonstrate

1. Relevancy The study was relevant to the topic area of the Research. The study explored the impact of an arts project with offenders and provided useful information regarding potential intermediate outcome measures. Transparency - The aims of the study were clearly stated. The process of research was transparent. Information was given on sample size, what data was collected, how it was collected and how it was analysed. Robustness The nature of the data collection was of a good standard for the research methodology used. For quantitative studies data was considered valid and reliable (e.g. validated scales were used). For qualitative studies the nature of the data collection was justifiable and information was given on the type of analysis undertaken. Coherence The methods chosen were suitable for the stated aims of the study. There was a clear and justifiable link between the findings and the conclusions.

2.

3.

4.

For reference: Standard quality assessment tool:

Score

Randomised control trial or closely matched comparison group

Comparison group experimental design (not closely matched)

Experiment comparing pre and post scores

Survey/ correlational study/ study using one data set

Systematic review or meta-analysis

Qualitative study

Narrative literature review, essay, opinion piece

5 4 3 2 1

Sample size above 200 Sample size 0-199

Sample size above 500 Sample size 200-499 Sample size 0-199

Sample size above 750 Sample size 500-749 Sample size 100-499 Sample size 0-99

Sample size above 1000 Sample size 500-999 Sample size 200-499 Sample size 0-199

All were scored 5*

All were scored 2* All were scored 1*

For more detail regarding this table, please contact Jessica.plant@clinks.org