Trends and developments in program evaluation in general and criminal justice programs in particular

European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research

Volumn 11, Issue 3-4, 2005, Pages 233-258

  Leeuw, Frans L ^a,b,c  

^a WODC   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c NONE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Criminal justice evaluations; Experimental designs; Future challenges regarding the combination of theory driven approaches and experimental ones; History of evaluations; International developments; Theory driven evaluations

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645301829     PISSN: 09281371     EISSN: 15729869     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10610-005-0835-2     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Bennet, T., The effectiveness of a police-initiated fear-reducing strategy. British Journal of Criminology, 31(1), pp. 1-14, 1991.
2. Boruch, R., P. Davies, H. Soydan, I. Chalmers, H. Cooper, A. Petrosino, D. DeMoya, D. Myers, A. Oxman, G. Macdonald, L. Hedges, R. Harden, R. Lilley et al., Progress on Developing the Campbell Collaboration: July 1999 and February 2000. Philadelphia: Center for Research & Evaluation in Social Policy, University of Pennsylvania, 2000.
3. Campbell, D.T. and J.C. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.
4. Chelimsky, E., The politics of program evaluation. Social Science and Modern Society, 25(24-32), 1987.
5. Cook, T.D., Why have educational evaluators chosen not to do randomized experiments? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589, pp. 114-148, 2003.
6. Cook, T.D. and C.S. Reichardt (Eds.), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1979.
7. Cooksy, L. and F.L. Leeuw, Evaluating the performance of development agencies: The role of meta-evaluations. In: G.K. Pitman, O.N. Feinstein and G.K. Ingram (Eds.), Evaluating development effectiveness, World Bank Series on Evaluation and Development, pp. 95-108. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2004.
8. Derlien, H.U., Genesis and structure of evaluation efforts in comparative perspective. In: R.C. Rist (Ed.), Program evaluation and the management of government, Patterns and prospects across eight nations, pp. 147-177. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1989.
9. Dickens, B., Contribution to the Symposium of Learning What Works: Evaluating Complex Social Interventions, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1997.
10. Duflo, E. and M. Kramer, Use of randomization in the evaluation of development effectiveness. In: O.K. Pitman, O.N. Feinstein and G.K. Ingram (Eds.), Evaluating development effectiveness, World Bank Series on Evaluation and Development, pp. 205-232. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2004.
11. Eckblom, P. and K. Pease, Evaluation crime prevention. In: M.H. Tonry andM.H. Farrington (Eds.), Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime Prevention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
12. Farrington, D.P., Methodological quality standards for evaluation. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Studies, 587, pp. 49-68, 2003.
13. Farrington, D.P. and B.C. Welsh, Home Office Research Study 251: Effects of improved street lighting on crime: A systematic review. London: Home Office, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2002.
14. Freeman, H.E., The present status of evaluation research. In: M.A. Guttenberg and S. Saar (Eds.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual, 2, pp. 17-51, 1977.
15. Furubo, J.E., R.C. Rist and R. Sandahl (Eds.), The International Atlas of Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002a.
16. Furubo, J.E. and R. Sandahl, Introduction: a diffusion perspective on global developments in evaluation. In: J.E. Furubo, R.C. Rist and R. Sandahl (Eds.), The International Atlas of Evaluation, pp. 1-27. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002b.
17. Gill, M. and A. Spriggs, Assessing the impact of CCTV. London: Home Office, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2005.
18. Goldblatt, P. and C. Lewis, Home Office Research Study 187: Reducing offending: An assessment of research evidence on ways of dealing with offending behaviour. London: Home Office, Development and Statistics Directorate, 1998.
19. Gray, A., B. Jenkins and F.L. Leeuw (Eds.), Collaboration in public services: the challenge for evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2003.
20. Hedstrom, P. and R. Swedberg (Eds.), Social Mechanisms. An Analytical Approach to Social Theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
21. Hovland, C.I., et al., Experiments in Mass communication. Vol. III: The American Soldier. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1949.
22. Johnson, S.D., K.J. Bowers, P. Jordan, N. Davidson and A. Hirschfield, Estimating crime reduction outcomes: how many crimes were prevented? Evaluation 10(3), pp. 327-348, 2004.
23. Klein Haarhuis, C., M. van Ooyen-Houben, E.R. Kleemans and F.L. Leeuw, Kennis voor beleid; een synthese van 58 (evaluatie)onderzoeken op het gebied van rechtshandhaving, The Hague: WODC, 2005.
24. Latour, B. and S. Woolgar, Laboratory Life. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1979.
25. Leeuw, F.L., Policy theories, knowledge utilization, and evaluation. Knowledge and Policy, 4, pp. 73-92, 1991.
26. Leeuw, F.L., Unintended side effects of auditing: The relationship between performance auditing and performance improvement and the role of trust. In: J. Weesie and W. Raub (Eds.), The management of durable relations, pp. 95-97. Amsterdam: Thela, 2000.
27. Leeuw, F.L., Reconstructing program theories: Methods available and problems to be solved. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(1), pp. 5-20, 2003.
28. Leeuw, F.L., Managing evaluations in the Netherlands and types of knowledge. In: R. Rist and N. Stame (Eds.), From Studies to Streams. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, in press.
29. Leeuw, F.L., R.C. Rist and R.C. Sonnichsen (Eds.), Can governments learn: comparative perspectives on evaluation and organizational learning. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1994.
30. Leeuw, F.L. and J. Toulemonde, Evaluation activities in Europe: A quick scan of the market in 1998. Evaluation, 5, pp. 487-496, 1999.
31. Leeuw, F.L. and S. Van Thiel, The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Productivity and Management Review, 25, pp. 123-143, 2002.
32. Mayne, J. and R. Schwartz (Eds.), Quality Matters. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2004.
33. Muir, E., They blinded me with political science: On the use of on-peer reviewed research in education policy. Political Science and Politics, 32(4), pp. 762-764, 1999.
34. Nuttal, C., The home office and random allocation experiments. Evaluation Review, 27(3), pp. 267-290, 2003.
35. Oakley, A., Experiments in knowing. London: Polity Press, 2000.
36. Orr, L.L., Social Experiments: Evaluating Public Programs with Experimental Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999.
37. Pawson, R., Does Megan's Law Work? A theory-driven systematic review, London: Queen Mary University of London, Working Paper 8, ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, 2002a.
38. Pawson, R., Evidence-based policy: The promise of 'realist synthesis'. Evaluation, 8(3), pp. 340-358, 2002b.
39. Pawson, R., Simple principles for the evaluation of complex programmes. Working Paper, Leeds: Leeds University, 2004.
40. Pawson, R. and N. Tilley, What works in evaluation research. British Journal of Criminology, 34(3), pp. 291-307, 1994.
41. Pawson, R. and N. Tilley, Realistic evaluation. London: Sage, 1997.
42. Pease, K., A review of street lighting evaluations: Crime reductions effects. Crime. Preven-tion Studies, 10, pp. 47-76, 1999.
43. Petrosino, A., et al., A Proposal for a Campbell Criminal Justice Group Paper developed for the February 2000 meeting of the Campbell Collaboration Draft 3, February 8th 2000. Campbell Collaboration, 2000.
44. Picciotto, R., Evaluation in the World Bank: antecedents, methods, and instruments. In: J. E. Furubo, R. C. Rist and R. Sandahl (Eds.), The International Atlas of Evaluation, pp. 425-439. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002.
45. Power, M., The Audit Society. London: Penguin, 1997.
46. Power, M., The Risk Management of Everything. Rethinking the Politics of Uncertainty. London: Demos, 2004.
47. Powers, E. and H. Witmer, An experiment in the prevention of juvenile delinquency: The Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study. New York: Columbia University Press, 1951.
48. Rist, R.C. (Ed.), Program evaluation and the management of government. Patterns and prospects across eight nations. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1989.
49. Rist, R. and K.L. Paliokas, The rise and fall (and rise again?) of the evaluation function in the U.S. Government. In: J.E. Furubo, R.C. Rist and R. Sandahl (Eds.), International Atlas of Evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002.
50. Rist, R. and N. Stame (Eds.), From Studies to Streams. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, in press.
51. Rossi, P.H., H.E. Freeman and M.W. Lipsey, Evaluation. A Systematic. Approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, 1999.
52. Scriven, M., Goal-free evaluation. In: E.R. House (Ed.), School Evaluation: The Politics and Processes (pp. 319-328). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1973.
53. Scriven, M., The Logic of Evaluatin. Inverness, CA: Edgepress, 1980.
54. Shadish, W.R., Program Evaluation: A Pluralistic Enterprise. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1993.
55. Shadish, W.R., T.D. Cook and L.C. Leviton, Foundations of program evaluation, theories of practice. London: Sage, 1995.
56. Sherman, L.W., D.P. Farrington, B.C. Welsh and D. Layton Mackenzie Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention. Routledge: London, 2002.
57. Sherman, L.W., D. Gottfredson, D. Mackenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter and S. Bushway. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, a Report to the United States Congress. Prepared for the National Institute of Justice, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, 1997.
58. Stame, N., Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation, 10(1), pp. 58-76, 2004.
59. Stame, N., Streams of evaluative knowledge: Introduction. In: R. Rist and N. Stame (Eds.), From studies to streams, pp. 1-23. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, in press.
60. Summa, H. and J. Toulemonde, Evaluation in the EU: Addressing complexity and ambiguity. In: J.E. Furubo, R.C. Rist and R. Sandahl (Eds.), The International Atlas of Evaluation, pp. 407-425. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002.
61. The Economist, Try it and see, 28 February 2002.
62. Tilley, N., Applying theory-driven evaluation to the British Crime Reduction Programme. Criminal Justice, 4(3), pp. 255-276, 2004.
63. US GAO, Prospective Evaluation Methods: The prospective evaluation synthesis. Washington: US General Accounting Office, 1990.
64. US GAO, Teenage pregnancy: 500,000 births a year but few tested prog rams. Washington: US General Accounting Office, 1996.
65. Vischer, C.A. and D. Weisburd, Identifying what works: Recent trends in crime prevention strategies. Crime, Law and Social Change, 28, pp. 223-242, 1998.
66. Wartna, B., N.J. Baas and E. Beenakkers, Beter, anders en goedkoper: een literatuurverkenning ten behoeve van het traject Modernisering Sanctietoepassing. Memorandum 2004-1. The Hague: WODC, 2004.
67. Weeks, H.A., Youthful offenders at Highfields. Ann Arbor, ML: University of Michigan Press, 1958.
68. Weiss, C.H., Where politics and evaluation research meet. Evaluation, 1, pp. 37-45, 1973.
69. Weisburd, D. and J.E. Eck, What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and fear? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593, pp. 42-65, 2004.
70. Wholey, J.S., Evaluability assessment: developing program theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 33, pp. 77-92, 1987.
71. Wildavsky, A., The self-evaluating organization. Public Administration Review, 32, pp. 509-520, 1972.
72. Wittebrood, K. and M. Van Beem, Sociale veiligheid vergroten door gelegenheidsbeperking: wat werkt en wat niet. Raad voor de Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling, bijlage 6, pp. 271-368, 2004.