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

Arthur L. Whaley
Additional contact information
Arthur L. Whaley: Russell Sage Foundation and Hogg Foundation for Mental Health University of Texas at Austin

Evaluation Review, 2006, vol. 30, issue 6, 803-816

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: grant review; mental health; philanthropy; rating form; reliability; validity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X06288737 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:evarev:v:30:y:2006:i:6:p:803-816

DOI: 10.1177/0193841X06288737

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Evaluation Review
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().