Self-assessment tools include a wide range of methods to gather information about a current situation or performance. They are designed to answer the question, "How are we doing?" These tools range from something as simple as a newspaper survey asking readers to rate their knowledge of the Internet to the kind of year-long institutional self- assessment procedures used in hospital accreditation. The essential element in all these tools is they recognize that many kinds of assessment questions are best answered by the person or group being assessed. In some cases, only the people themselves have access to the necessary information, or the collection and assessment procedures would be far too intrusive or expensive for an external agency to perform.

Self-administered questionnaires. The simplest form of self- assessment is a self-administered questionnaire or test. In order for the assessment to work, the questions must be sound and the participants must understand the criteria and provide valid responses. The answers are usually accompanied by an answer key and information on how to interpret a score.

Informal evaluations. For informal self-assessments, such as the newspaper variety, neither the questions nor the resulting interpretation scales have any particular scientific basis, and are at best rough guides. More comprehensive self- assessments and accreditation procedures usually involve the participation of those being assessed in setting and reviewing goals. In the typical institutional assessment, the evaluation criteria are a mix of external standards developed by the accrediting body combined with the institution's own goals and criteria. So, establishing and reviewing goals is a part of the self-assessment process.

Performance evaluations. If well designed, self-assessment can be a highly efficient kind of performance or status evaluation. The main cost of the process is the development of valid assessment tools and procedures. Once developed, the tools may be used repeatedly without the need for outside intervention.

Do-it-yourself. The kinds of information called for by the assessment tools may be quite extensive and complex to assemble. And the kinds of internal deliberations involved in institutional self-assessments require considerable staff time. But they avoid the costs of external consultants and analysts.

Build consensus, morale. The deliberative processes in setting goals and reviewing performance can have positive effects on the organization by building consensus, enhancing morale, and increasing understanding of operations.

Screen for problems. Self-assessment instruments can also be efficient screening devices to identify possible problems or areas for further attention. Self-administered surveys are often used in organizational development work to identify these areas and issues.

Planning tool. Self-assessment can also be used as a planning tool. One of the key planning questions to be answered in justice information integration is, "Where do we stand in terms of overall integration?" Your plan should be based on the most accurate possible assessment of past progress and the current status of integration efforts.

Hard to validate. Self-assessment tools are difficult to validate. The fact that they produce a measurement or evaluation result does not mean that it is accurate or meaningful. Interpretation must be done with careful attention to the validity of the tools and how they were used.

Distorted results. Those involved in the self-assessment can distort the results a number of ways. They may deliberately provide false or misleading information to promote their own interests: provide inaccurate data due to their own biases, faulty memories, or flawed perceptions; be unduly influenced by others in the process, either deliberately or inadvertently. And the data sources on which the assessment is based may themselves be of low quality.

Bias of the tools. The tools themselves could be badly designed or insufficiently tested, or there may be accidental but serious flaws in the information produced. The assessment tools could be deliberately designed to favor a particular point of view or desired outcome.