Policy workaround stories are valuable evaluative indicators: But should they be told?

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 408-417

  Campbell, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

confidentiality; discretion; policy implementation; power; workaround

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960710442     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: 15570878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1098214011405505     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ambrose S.Citizen soldiers. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster; 1997:.
2. Bardach E.The implementation game: What happens after a bill becomes a law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1977:.
3. Brehm J.,Gates S.Working, shirking, and sabotage: Bureaucratic response to a democratic public. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press; 1997:.
4. Campbell D.Beyond Charitable Choice: The Diverse Service Delivery Approaches of Local Faith-related Organizations.Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2002;31:207-230.
5. Campbell D.UC Davis Research Design.Evaluation of California's Workforce Investment System. 2004;:.
6. Campbell D.,Wright J.Rethinking Welfare School-Attendance Policies.Social Service Review. 2005;79:2-28.
7. Campbell D.,Glunt E.Assessing the Effectiveness of Faith-based Programs: A Local Network Perspective.Social Thought: Journal of Religion and Spirituality in Social Work. 2006;25:241-259.
8. Campbell D.Final Report: UC Davis Evaluation of California's Workforce Development System. Prepared for California Workforce Investment Board (with Cathy Lemp, Jeanette Treiber, Jean Lamming, Bob Pence, and Bernadette Tarallo). 2006;:.
9. Campbell D.Democratic Norms to Deliberative Forms: Managing Tools and Tradeoffs in Community-based Civic Engagement.Public Administration and Management. 2010a;15:305-341.
10. Campbell D.,Erstein N.Sacramento, CA: Sierra Health Foundation; 2010b:.
11. Dodson L.The moral underground: How ordinary Americans subvert an unfair economy. New York, NY: The New Press; 2009:.
12. Donaldson S. I.,Gooler L. E.,Scriven M.Strategies for managing evaluation anxiety: Toward a psychology of program evaluation.American Journal of Evaluation. 2002;23:261-273.
13. Elmore R. F.Backward mapping: implementation research and policy decisions.Political Science Quarterly. 1979;94:601-616.
14. Honig M. I.New directions in educational policy implementation. New York, NY: State University of New York Press; 2006:.
15. Levin M. A.,Sanger M. B.Making government work: How entrepreneurial executives turn bright ideas into real results. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1994:.
16. Lincoln Y.,Guba E.Paper presented at the Joint Annual Meeting of the Evaluation Network and the Evaluation Research Society; 1981Austin, TX; 1981.
17. Lipsky M.Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1980:.
18. Lurie I.Implementation analysis: An evaluation approach whose time has come. Corbett ThomasLennon Mary Clare, ed. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press; 2001:.
19. Micheli P.,Neely A.Performance measurement in the public sector in England: Searching for the golden thread.Public Administration Review. 2010;70:591-600.
20. Nathan R.Social science in government: The role of policy researchers. Albany, NY: The Rockefeller Institute Press; 2000:.
21. Patton M. Q.Developmental evaluation. New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 2010:.
22. Pressman J.L.,Wildavsky A.Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1973:.
23. Radin P.The method and theory of ethnology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1933:.
24. Sennett R.The Craftsman. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2008:.
25. Storing H. J.Bureaucrats, policy analysts, statesman: Who leads?. Goodwin R. A., ed. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute; 1980:88-113.
26. Vestal K.Untitled article in Nurse Leader.6. 2008, August;:8-9.
27. Welch S. J.The Wal-Mart ED: higher volume means new paradigms.Emergency Medicine News. 2008;30:20-21.