This study examined the evaluation practices of organizations that are accredited to provide continuing nursing education (CNE) and continuing medical education (CME). The study objectives were to: describe the frequency of evaluation performed related to reaction (level 1), learning (level 2), behavior change (level 3), organizational impact (level 4), and return on investment (level 5); explore the influence of organizational variables on the frequency of evaluation; and compare the results of this study to previous research studies that investigated similar questions in various industry segments. A mixed methods research design was used. Data analysis was done using descriptive and nonparametric inferential statistics and also used emergent coding of themes with the qualitative data.

This study provided an important benchmark related to the use of evaluation within CNE and CME, which have previously not been reported in the literature. Overall, the frequency of evaluation reported in CNE and CME was comparable to the range of results reported in previous studies, with the widest degree of difference noted with the higher use of level one (reaction) evaluation in both CNE and CME. Primary barriers to conducting evaluation were cost in person-hours and/or capital, lack of training/experience, and unavailability of data. Organizational variables that had an influence on evaluation frequency were expertise in conducting evaluation, evaluation planning, use of evaluation results, financial support for evaluation, methods to isolate effects of education, the volume of CE (continuing education) activities offered annually, and the number of participants in CE activities. Recommendations for practice were to provide training on evaluation, develop policies to guide the evaluation process, implement systems to aggregate evaluation related data, and to foster a culture that values the contribution that evaluation can provide to the CE unit and the broader organization. Recommendations for future research include conducting more research of this kind in other populations of nursing and medicine and perhaps in other clinical fields such as pharmacy, physical therapy, and dietetics to explore variables that are relevant to evaluation in continuing education for clinically based professions and to provide benchmarking sources for evaluation practices across professions.