Pre- and post-planned evaluations are complements not alternatives: A reply to Strasser and Deniston

Strasser and Deniston's own analysis shows that post-planned evaluations are unsuitable substitutes for pre-planned evaluations. When viewed as post-experimental interviews, however, post-planned evaluations can produce valuable information which complements traditional experimental and quasi-experimental evaluations.     

A critique of social indicators analysis and key informants surveys as needs assessment methods

This paper reports data from a pilot study designed to determine the practicality and utility of two differing needs assessment methodologies: social indicators analysis and key informants surveys. The authors found social indicators analysis successfully identified differential areas of need within the SMSA which served as the research site. They suggest it is a practical and valid means for assessing human service needs at a general level. The key informants survey was judged to be less useful. Informants generally were unable to identify the extent of differing types of needs or their geographic distribution. It is suggested additional research utilizing differing designs must be completed before meaningful conclusions can be reached about the utility of the key informants survey as a needs assessment method.     

China Regional Income Convergence:Using Spatial Panel data

This paper uses spatial panel data models to analyze regional growth in China.Controlling for fixed-effects allows us to disentangle the effect of spatial dependence from that of spatial heterogeneity and omitted variable to investigate the regional convergence process within the country.     

Ethical problems in program evaluation: Advice for trapped evaluators

This paper argues that ethical problems in program evaluation are increased when conflicting or incompatible evaluation models are applied concurrently. Three models are illustrated: an Amelioration Model, generating better information for a program's own decision makers; an Accountability Model, focusing on public data disclosure and citizen participation in evaluation; and an Advocacy Model, in which the evaluation is designed to advance the program's interests in the competition for resources. Ethical problems inherent in each model, and arising from combining models are presented, along with case examples and discussion. The authors suggest several directions that program evaluators can consider to reduce their vulnerability to ethical problems.