Evaluation Resources

General

  • AEA Task Force on Guiding Principles for Evaluators. (1995). Guiding Principles for Evaluators. New Directions in Program Evaluation, (66), 19-26.

  • Alkin, M.C. (1990). Debates on Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Alkin, Marvin and Christina Christie (2004). Chapter Two: An Evaluation Theory Tree. In Alkin (eds) Evaluation Roots: Tracing Theorists Views and Influence. London: Sage Publications http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/5074_Alkin_Chapter_2.pdf

  • American Journal of Evaluation. (2008). Guiding Principles for Evaluators.

  • Berk, R., & Rossi, P. (1990). Thinking About Program Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Birch-Jones, J. (2002). Integrating PM and Evaluation: Bridging the Chasm. Presentation to the Conference for the Canadian Evaluation Society – National Capital Region.

  • Boardman, Anthony et al. (2011) Cost-Benefit Analysis; Concepts and Practice . Prentice Hall.

  • Boulmetis J. & Dutwin P.(2005) The ABCs of Evaluation, 2th ed., C.A. : Josse –Bass.

  • Canadian Evaluation Society (CES). Ethical Guidelines. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from CES Website: http://www.evaluationcanada.ca/site.cgi?s=5&ss=4&_lang=an

  • Center for the Advancement of Community Based Public Health. (2000). An Evaluation Framework for Community Health Programs. Durham, NC: CBPH.

  • Chelimsky, E., & Shadish, W.R. (eds.) (1997). Evaluation for the 21st Century: A Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Cohen, A., & Adams, B. (1991). Process evaluation: rationale and application. In A. Love (Ed.), Evaluation Methods Sourcebook, (pp. 80-103). Toronto, ON: Canadian Evaluation Society.

  • Corbeil, R. (1992). Evaluation assessment: A case study of planning an evaluation. In J. Hudson, J. Mayne, & R. Thomlison (Eds.), Action-Oriented Evaluation in Organizations: Canadian Practices (pp. 107-128). Toronto, ON: Wall & Emerson.

  • Corbeil, R., & McQueen  C. (1991). Improving the quality of evaluation. In A. Love (Ed.), Evaluation Methods Sourcebook: (pp. 196‑213). Toronto, ON: Canadian Evaluation Society.

  • Cousins, Goh, Aubry, Lahey, Montague and Elliott. (2006). What Makes Evaluation Useful in Government? A Concept Mapping, Study. American Evaluation Association Presentation, November 2006.

  • Donaldson, S. (2007). Program Theory Driven Evaluation Science: Strategies and Applications. New York: Taylor and Francis Group

  • Dwyer, J.J.M. (1996). Applying program logic model in program planning and evaluation. Public Health and Epidemiology Report Ontario, 7(2), 38-46.

  • Fetterman, D.M., Kaftarian, S.J., & Wandersman, A. (Eds.). (1996). Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment and Accountability Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Funnel, S. & Rogers, P.  (2011). Purpose Program Theory: Effective use of Theories of Change and Logic Models.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

  • Goodrick, D. (2002). Building Capacity in Evaluation: The Role of Evaluation Planning. Australian Evaluation Society.

  • Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Hatry, H. P. (1999). Performance Measurement Getting Results. The Urban Institute Press, Washington, D.C.

  • Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (2011). The Program Evaluation Standards: A Guide for Evaluators and Evaluation Users. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Kee, J. E. (1994). Benefit-cost analysis in program evaluation. In Wholey, J.S., Hatry, H.P., & Newcomer, K.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Leeuw, F. (2005). Trends and Developments in Program Evaluation in General and Criminal Justice Programs in Particular. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 11(3-4), 233-258.

  • Love, A. (1991b). Internal Evaluation: Building Organizations from Within. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Madak, P. (1994). Ethical considerations when using qualitative methods in evaluation. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 9(2), 1-13.

  • Mayne, J., & Hudson, J. (1992). Program evaluation: An overview. In J. Hudson, J. Mayne and R. Thomlison (Eds.), Action-Oriented Evaluation in Organizations: Canadian Practices. (pp. 1-21), Toronto, ON: Wall & Emerson, Inc.

  • Mayne, J. (1999). Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibility. Discussion paper. Retrieved May 14, 2012, Office of the Auditor General of Canada: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/99dp1_e.pdf

  • Mayne, J. (2001). Addressing Attribution Through Contribution Analysis: Using Performance Measures Sensibly. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 16(1), 1-24.

  • Mayne, J. (2003). Reporting on Outcomes: Setting performance Expectations and Telling Performance Stories. Discussion paper. Retrieved May 14, 2012, Office of the Auditor General of Canada http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/meth_gde_e_10189.html

  • Mayne, J. (2006). Audit and Evaluation in Public Management. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 21(1), 11-45.

  • McDavid, J. & Hawthorn, L.  (2006). Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement: An Introduction to Practice. London: Sage Publications

  • Montague, S. (1997). The Three Rs of Performance: Core Concepts for Planning, Measurement, and Management. Ottawa, ON: Performance Management Network, Inc.

  • Montague, S. (2005). Performance Planning, Measurement and Reporting For Continuous Improvement, CES-AEA Workshop.

  • Müller-Clemm and Barnes. (1997). A Historical Perspective on Federal Program Evaluation in Canada, The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 12(1), 47-70.

  • Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (1997). “Crown Corporations: Making Performance Measurement Work” in Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from OAG Website: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_199712_22_e_8104.html

  • Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (2000). Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from OAG Website: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_lp_e_933.html

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002).Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from OECD Website: http://www.oecd.org/LongAbstract/0,3425,en_2649_34435_2754808_1_1_1_1,00.html

  • Owen, J. M., & Rogers, P. (1999). Program Evaluation: Forms and Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Owen, J., (2006). Program Evaluation Forms and Approaches (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2006). Evaluation for the Way We Work. The Nonprofit Quarterly, Spring 2006, 28-33.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.

  • Posavac, E., & Carey, R. (1996). Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Rush, B., & Ogborne, A. (1991). Program logic models: expanding their role and structure for program planning and evaluation. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 6(1), 95-106.

  • Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

  • Sechrest, L. (1985). Social science and social policy: Will our numbers ever be good enough? In R. Shotland & M. Mark (Eds.), Social Science and Social Policy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Segsworth. (2005). Program Evaluation in Canada: Plus Ça Change… The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 20(3), 195-197.

  • Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Leviton, L. (1991). Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Shulha, L.M., & Cousins, J.B. (1997). Evaluation use: Theory, research and practice since 1986. Evaluation Practice, 18(3), 195-208.

  • Smith, D. (1992). The evaluation of program efficiency. In J. Hudson, J. Mayne and R. Thomlison (Eds.), Action-Oriented Evaluation in Organizations: Canadian Practices, (pp. 180-194). Toronto, ON: Wall and Emerson.

  • Soriano, F.I. (1995). Conducting Needs Assessments: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2010). Health of the Evaluation Function.  Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/orp/2011/arhef-raefetb-eng.asp

  • Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2009).TBS Policy on Evaluation. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from TBS Website:  http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=15024

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2009). Directive on the Evaluation Function.  Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=15681

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2009). Standard on Evaluation for the Government of Canada.  Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=15688

  • Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Results-Based Management Lexicon. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/lex-lex_e.asp

  • Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada. Case Studies on the Uses and Drivers of Effective Evaluations in the Government of Canada. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/eval/tools_outils/impact/impact_e.asp#5.0

  • Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (1981) Guide on the Program Evaluation Function. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/eval/pubs/pubs-to-1995/orig-gd_e.asp

  • Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2000). Results for Canadians. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/res_can/rctb-eng.asp

  • Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2000). Policy on Transfer Payments. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from TBS Website: www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/dcgpubs/tbm_142/ptp_e.asp

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2005). Preparing and Using Results-based Management and Accountability Frameworks. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/cee/pubs/guide/prep-rmaf-cgrr-eng.pdf

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2004) Government of Canada Guide for the Review of Evaluation Reports. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/cee/tools-outils/grer-gere-eng.pdf

  • Vedung, E. (1998). Policy instruments: typologies and theories. In ML Bemelmans-Videc, R.C Rist and E. Vedung (eds). Carrots, Sticks and Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

  • Weiss, C., Murphy-Graham, E. and Birkeland, S. (2005). An Alternate Route to Policy Influence. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1).

  • Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (eds.). (2010). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Witkin, B.R., & Altschuld, J.W. (1995). Planning and Conducting Needs Assessments: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Worthen, B.R., Fitzpatrick, J.L., & Sanders, J.R. (1997). Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines. New York, NY: Longman.

  • Zorzi and Associates. (2002). Canadian Evaluation Society Project in Support of Advocacy and Professional Development. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from Canadian Evaluation Website: http://consultation.evaluationcanada.ca/pdf/ZorziCESReport.pdf

Methods and design

  • Babbie, E. (2000). The Practice of Social Research (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

  • Barrington, G. (1986). The delphi as a naturalistic evaluation tool. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 1(2), 81-88.

  • Berg, B. (1995). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

  • Biemer, P., Groves, R., Lyberg, L., Mathiowetz, N., & Sudman, S. (eds.). (1991). Measurement Errors in Surveys. Toronto, ON: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

  • Blais, R. (1990). Assessing patient satisfaction with health care: Did you drop somebody? The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 5(2), 1-13.

  • Blalock, H. (1982). Conceptualization and Measurement in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Boberg, A., & Morris-Khoo, S. (1992). The delphi method: A review of methodology and an application in the evaluation of a higher education program. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 7(1), 27-39.

  • Boruch, R., & Gomez, H. (1979). Measuring impact: Power theory in social program evaluation. In L. Datta & R. Perloff (Eds.), Improving Evaluations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Sage University Papers No. 07-017.

  • Campbell, D., Boruch, R., Schwartz, R., & Steinberg, J. (1977). Confidentiality-preserving modes of access to files and to interfile exchange for useful statistical analysis. Evaluation Quarterly, 1(2), 269-300.

  • Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally College Publishing Company.

  • Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Converse, J., & Presser, S. (1986). Survey questions: Handcrafting the standardized questionnaire. Sage University Papers No. 07-063.

  • Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis for Field Settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

  • Cooper, H. M. (1998). Synthesizing research: A guide for literature reviews. (3rd ed.). Applied Social Research Methods Series 2.

  • Creswell, J. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet Surveys:The Tailored  Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Favaro, P. (1995) Consumer satisfaction with mental health services: Methodological, measurement and practical issues. In A. Love (Ed.), Evaluation Methods Sourcebook, (pp. 80-103). Toronto, ON: Canadian Evaluation Society.

  • Fink, A. (2002). The Survey Kit (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Fowler, F. (1995). Improving Survey Questions: Design and Evaluation. Applied Social Research Methods Series 38.

  • Hakim, S., & Weinblatt, J. (1993). The Delphi process as a tool for decision making: The case of vocational training of people with handicaps. Evaluation and Program Planning, (16), 25-38.

  • Johnson, A. (1977). Social Statistics Without Tears. (Chapter 2: Measurement). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

  • Kirk, J., & Miller, M. (1988). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Sage University Paper Series on Qualitative Research Methods, Vol. 2.

  • Krueger, R.A., & Casey, M.A. (2000). Focus Groups – A Practical Guide for Applied Research. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Levin, H. (1983). Cost-Effectiveness: A Primer. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Love, A. (ed.). (1991). Evaluation Methods Sourcebook. Toronto, ON: Canadian Evaluation Society.

  • Love, A. (1995). Evaluation Methods Sourcebook II. Toronto, ON: Canadian Evaluation Society.

  • Mangione, T. (1995). Mail Surveys: Improving the Quality. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

  • Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (1989). Designing Qualitative Research. Beverly Hills CA: Sage.

  • Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage: Newbury Park, CA.

  • Miller, D. (1991). Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement (5th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Morgan, D. L., & Krueger, R. A. (1997). The Focus Group Kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Morgan, D.L. (1989). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Rossi, P., Wright, J., & Anderson, A. (eds.). (1983). Handbook of Survey Research. Toronto, ON: Academic Press.

  • Rutman, L. (1984). Evaluation Research Methods: A Basic Guide. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publication.

  • Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1996). Questions & Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording and Context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Staisey, N., & Rutman, L. (1992). The use of randomized designs for assessment. In J. Hudson, J. Mayne and R. Thomlison (Eds.), Action-Oriented Evaluation in Organizations: Canadian Practices. (pp. 215-229), Toronto, ON: Wall & Emerson, Inc.

  • Stewart, D., & Shamdasani, P. (1990). Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Treasury Board of Canada. (1998). Program Evaluation Methods: Measurement and Attribution of Program Results (3rd ed.). Retrieved May 14, 2012 from TB Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/eval/pubs/meth/pem-mep_e.asp

  • Tremblay et al., (2010), The Canada Foundation for Innovation’s outcome measurement study: a pioneering approach to research evaluation, Research Evaluation, 19 (5), pp. 333-345.

  • Weisberg, H., Bowen, B., & Krosnick, J. (1996). An Introduction to Survey Research, Polling and Data Analysis (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

  • Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Workbooks and other how-to guides

  • Bond, S.E., Bond, S.L., & Rapp, K. (1997). Taking Stock: A Practical Guide to Evaluating Your Own Programs. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from Horizon Research Inc., Chapel Hill, NC Website: http://www.horizon-research.com/reports/1997/stock.pdf

  • Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). (2002). How to Perform Evaluations: A Ten-Part Series. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from CIDA Website: http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/acdi-cida.nsf/eng/EMA-218131657-PG4

  • Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). (2000). Evaluation Guide. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from CIDA Website: http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/INET/IMAGES.NSF/vLUImages/Performancereview5/$file/English_E_guide.pdf

  • Health Canada. (2008) Evaluation Project Workplan Assessment Guide.

  • Health Canada. (2006) Results-based Management and Accountability Framework Assessment Guide.

  • McNamara, C. (2002). Nuts-and-Bolts Guide to Nonprofit Program Design, Marketing and Evaluation. Minneapolis, MN: Authenticity Consulting.

  • Frechtling, J., & Sharp L. (1997). User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluation. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) National Science Foundation Website: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf97153/start.htm

  • Plantz, M. C., Greenway, M. T. & Hendricks, M. (1997). Outcome Measurement: Showing Results in the Nonprofit Sector. In K.E Newcomer (Ed.), Using Performance Measurement to Improve Public and Nonprofit Programs. (pp. 15-30), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Porteous, N. L., Sheldrick, B. J., & Stewart, P. J. (1997). Program Evaluation Tool Kit. A Blueprint for Public Health Management. Ottawa-Carleton Teaching Health Unit Program and Ontario Ministry of Health. Ottawa, ON.

  • Administration for Children and Families. (2010). The Program Manager’s Guide to Evaluation (2nd ed.). Retrieved May 14, 2012, from United States Department of Health & Human Services Website: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/other_resrch/pm_guide_eval/reports/pmguide/pmguide_toc.html

  • Treasury Board Secretariat. (2001). Guide for the Development of Results-based Management and Accountability Frameworks. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from TBS Website: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/cee/tools-outils/rmaf-cgrr/guide01-eng.asp

  • United Nations Development Programme Evaluation Office. (2002). Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for Results. New York, NY: UNDP.

  • United Way of America. (1996). Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach. Alexandria, VA: United Way of America.

  • W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Evaluation Handbook. Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from W.K. Kellogg Foundation Website:  http://www.wkkf.org/knowledge-center/resources/2010/W-K-Kellogg-Foundation-Evaluation-Handbook.aspx

  • W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2001). Logic Model Development Guide. Retrieved May 14, 2012 from W.K. Kellogg Foundation Website: http://www.wkkf.org/knowledge-center/resources/2006/02/WK-Kellogg-Foundation-Logic-Model-Development-Guide.aspx

  • Wong-Reiger, D., & David, L. (1994). A Hands-on Guide to Planning and Evaluation: How to Plan and Evaluate Programs in Community-Based Organizations. Ottawa: Canadian Haemophilia Society (Note: available from the National AIDS Clearinghouse in Ottawa; telephone 613-725-3769).

Other Websites with evaluation information and/or tools

(all Website links are as of August 30, 2003)

 

Other resources