Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by St. Pierre, R. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by St. Pierre, R. G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, 411-436 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8300700401

Congressional Input To Program Evaluation

Scope and Effects

Robert G. St. Pierre

Abt Associates Inc.

With increasing frequency the U. S. Congress is including mandates for evaluation in legislation that creates or reauthorizes social programs. Recent examinations of the federal role in evaluation have claimed that congressional calls for evaluation are overly vague and that improved evaluation would result from greater specification of informa tion needs by Congress. This article considers the advantages and disadvantages of increasing the specificity of legislation calling for evaluation by reviewing the congres sional mandates for several national-level evaluations and examining in-depth the design of one congressionally mandated evaluation that included very specific design parameters in the authorizing legislation. The conclusion is that congressional input in the areas of evaluation questions, audiences, and timeliness is warranted and important, while explic itness in areas of research design is unnecessarily restrictive and can diminish the quality of evaluations. Congressional review of evaluation plans prepared by federal agencies and their contractors is recommended in cases where Congress is concerned about meth odology.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?