Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
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 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vosburgh, W. W.
Right arrow Articles by Cornelius, S. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Vosburgh, W. W.
Right arrow Articles by Cornelius, S. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluating Emergency Programs

Principles, Definitions, and Measurements

William W. Vosburgh

Bryn Mawr College

Timothy Baker

Adelphi University

Sandra S. Cornelius

Delaware County Pennsylvania

Emergency programs, which often call for exceptions to ordinary rules and procedures and flexible, short-term, reactive activities that preempt attention from overall ends, pose special problems for both process and goal-attainment evaluations. An emergency is defined as: (1) a change in life circumstances so that individuals who could ordinarily cope can no longer do so without additional resources, and (2) a situation from which life-threatening or dangerous consequences are thought to flow. Relaxed standards are suggested in areas of targeting and coverage, equity, and efficiency. Such important secondary gains as development of community resources, establishing and reinforcing service networks, problem identification, and advocacy should be included in any general evaluation.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 10, No. 3, 299-311 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8601000303
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector QuarterlyHome page
W. W. Vosburgh
Voluntary Associations, the Homeless and Hard-to-Serve Populations-Perspectives from Organizational Theory
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, January 1, 1988; 17(1): 10 - 23.
[Abstract]