Assessing international evaluations: An example from USAID's democracy and governance program

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 189-203

  Bollen, Kenneth ^a   Paxton, Pamela ^b   Morishima, Rumi ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Democracy; Governance; International evaluations; USAID

Indexed keywords

EID: 20344408500     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1098214005275640     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. The Asia Foundation. (1992). Democratic pluralism initiative - Evaluation of programs for Afghan women. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Biddle Associates, Foundation for a Civil Society, & USAID/Slovakia. (1997). Mid-term evaluation of the Democracy Network Project in Slovakia. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
3. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
4. Bureau for Policy and Program Coordination. (1995). Rwanda evaluation: Promoting human rights and building a fair judicial system. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
5. Carothers, T. (1999). Aiding democracy abroad: The learning curve. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
6. Center for Development Information and Evaluation. (1994). Weighing in on scales of justice: Strategic approaches for donor-supported rule of law programs. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
7. Center for Development Information and Evaluation. (1996). Constituencies for reform: Strategic approaches for donor-supported civic advocacy programs. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
8. Center for Development Information and Evaluation. (1998). Spreading power to the periphery. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
9. Center for Development Information and Evaluation. (2000). Aftermath: Women and gender issues in postconflict Guatemala. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
10. Center for International Private Enterprise. (1994). Interim evaluation Project on Legal and Regulatory Reform in Hungary. Washington, DC: Author.
11. Checchi and Company Consulting. (1994). Final report: Evaluation of the Improved Electoral Administration Project. Washington, DC: Author.
12. City University of New York, Baruch College. (1983). Final evaluation report on the First Dominican Legislative Training Program. New York: Author.
13. Clapp-Wincek, C., & Blue, R. (2001). Evaluation of recent USAID evaluation experience. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
14. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
15. Cordray, D. S., & Fischer, R. L. (1994). Synthesizing evaluation findings. In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, & K. E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 198-238). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16. Development Associates. (2003). Final evaluation: Office of Transition Initiatives Program in East Timor. Arlington, VA: Author.
17. Dugger, C. (2004, July 28). World Bank challenged: Are the poor really helped? The New York Times, p. A4.
18. Forss, K., & Carlsson, J. (1997). The quest for quality - Or can evaluation findings be trusted? Evaluation, 3, 481-501.
19. Hopstock, P. J., Kellum, A. C., & Young, M. B. (1989). Review of the quality of A.I.D. evaluations FY 1987 and FY 1988 (A.I.D. Evaluation Occasional Paper No. 19). Washington, DC: USAID.
20. International Science and Technology Institute. (1989). Report on tax reform in Somalia: Evaluation of the recommendations and suggestions for implementation. Arlington, VA: Author.
21. Lipsey, M. W. (1997). What can you build with thousands of bricks? Musings on the cumulation of knowledge in program evaluation. New Directions for Evaluations, 76, 7-23.
22. Management Systems International. (1996). Evaluation of the activities of the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute in Albania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, and Lithuania. Washington, DC: Author.
23. Management Systems International. (2001). The transition to sustainable democracy in South Africa and the strategic role of USAID. Washington, DC: Author.
24. Management Systems International. (2002). USAID/Croatia democracy and governance activities impact on political change: 1995-2000. Washington, DC: Author.
25. Management Systems International. (2003). Linking USAID democracy program impact to political change: A synthesis of findings from six case studies. Washington, DC: Author.
26. Picciotto, R. (2003). International trends and development evaluation: The need for ideas. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 227-234.
27. Posavac, E. J., & Carey, R. G. (2003). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28. Rosenberg, L. J., & Posner, L. D. (1971). The logical framework approach and training materials developed for USAID. Washington, DC: Practical Concepts.
29. Rosenberg, L. J., & Posner, L. D. (1979). The logical framework: A manager's guide to a scientific approach to design and evaluation (USAID Document PN-ABN963 82060). Washington, DC: Practical Concepts.
30. Stepanek, J. E. (1979). Development Decentralization Project under the Organization for Reconstruction and Development of the Egyptian village. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
31. Stufflebeam, D. L. (2002). CIPP evaluation model checklist: A tool for applying the fifth installment of the CIPP model to assess long-term enterprises. Retrieved from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/ cippchecklist.htm
32. Tech Support Services & USAID/Europe & Eurasia. (1995). Final report: Evaluation of local government activities in USAID programs in Central/Eastern Europe. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development.
33. Thunder and Associates. (1993). Final report: The IFES interim evaluation. Washington, DC: Author.
34. Toffolon Weiss, M. M., Bertrand, J. T., & Terrell, S. S. (1999). The results framework - An innovative tool for program planning and evaluation. Evaluation Review, 23, 336-359.
35. United States Agency for International Development/Bangladesh. (1995). USAID/Bangladesh: Project assistance completion report - Human Rights Support Project. Washington, DC: Author.
36. United States Agency for International Development/Haiti. (1995). Evaluation of PIRED, the umbrella management unit of the Democracy Enhancement Project. Washington, DC: Author.
37. United States Agency for International Development/Latin America and Caribbean. (1988). General evaluation report: VI interdisciplinary course, InterAmerican Institute of Human Rights. Washington, DC: Author.
38. United States Agency for International Development/Senegal. (1994). Project assistance completion report for the Senegal Elections Assistance Project. Washington, DC: Author.
39. United States Agency for International Development/Zimbabwe. (2001). Evaluation of the Zimbabwe American Development Foundation (ZADF) Project. Washington, DC: Author.
40. U.S. General Accounting Office. (1995). Cambodia: Limited progress on free elections, human rights, and mine clearing. Washington, DC: Author.
41. Valadez, J., & Bamberger, M. (1994). Monitoring and evaluating social programs in developing countries: A handbook for policymakers, managers, and researchers. Washington, DC: Economic Development Institute of the World Bank.
42. Wholey, J. S. (1979). Evaluation: Promise and performance. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
43. Wholey, J. S. (1983). Evaluation and effective public management. Boston: Little, Brown.
44. Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H., & Newcomer, K. E. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.