Program theory-driven evaluation science: Strategies and applications

Program Theory-Driven Evaluation Science: Strategies and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 1-264

  Donaldson, Stewart I ^a  

^a CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84908902323     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203809730     Document Type: Book

References (137)

1. Adkins, J. A. (1999). Promoting organizational health: The evolving practice of occupational health psychology. Professional Psychology, 30(2), 129-137.
2. Adler, N. E., Marmot, M., McEwen, B. S., & Stewart, J. (1999). Socioeconomic status and health in industrial nations. New York: New York Academic Sciences.
3. Aley, J. (1995). Where the jobs are. Fortune, 132, 53-56.
4. Alkin, M. C. (Ed.) (2004). Evaluation roots. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Alkin, M. C., & Christie, C. A. (2004). An evaluation theory tree. in M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation roots (pp. 12-65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Alkin, M. C., & Christie, C. A. (Eds.) (2005). Theorists’ models in action. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7. American Evaluation Association. (2004, July). Guiding principles for evaluators. Retrieved February 24, 2004, from http://www.eval.org
8. Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (1997). Theory driven evaluation of an environmental policy measure: Using the theory of planned behavior. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie, 28(4), 280-297.
9. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
10. Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 33, 5-18.
11. Bickman, L. (1996). A continuum of care: More is not always better. American Psychologist, 51(7), 689-701.
12. Brousseau, R., & Yen, I. (2000). Reflections on connections between work and health. Thousand Oaks, CA: California Wellness Foundation.
13. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1999, July). Unemployed persons by state, and duration of unemployment. Retrieved July 1, 1999, from http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#1999
14. The California Work and Health Survey (1998, September). San Francisco, CA: University of California.
15. Campbell, B., & Mark, M. M. (2006). Toward more effective stakeholder dialogue: Applying theories of negotiation to policy and program evaluation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(12), 2834-2863.
16. Centers for Disease Control. (1999) Centers for Disease Control Program Evaluation Framework (1999). 48 (RR11), 1-40.
17. Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18. Chen, H. T. (1997). Applying mixed methods under the framework of theory- driven evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation, 74, 61-72.
19. Chen, H. T. (2004). The roots of theory-driven evaluation: Current views and origins. in M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation roots (pp. 132-152). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Chen, H. T. (2005). Practical program evaluation: Assessing and improving planning, implementation, and effectiveness. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21. Chen, H. T., & Rossi, P. H. (1983). Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach. Evaluation Review, 7, 283-302.
22. Chen, H. T., & Rossi, P. H. (1987). The theory-driven approach to validity. Evaluation & Program Planning, 10, 95-103.
23. Chen H. T., Wang J. C. S., & Lin, L. H. (1997). Evaluating the process and outcome of a garbage reduction program in Taiwan. Evaluation Review, 21(1), 27-42.
24. Christie, C. A. (Ed.). (2003). The practice-theory relationship in evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
25. Cook, T. D. (1985). Post-positivist critical multiplism. in R. L. Shotland & M. M. Mark (Eds.), Social science and social policy (pp. 21-61). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26. Cook, T. D., Murphy, R. F. & Hunt, H. D. (2000). Comer’s school development program in Chicago: A theory-based evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 535-597.
27. Cousins, J. B., & Leithwood, K. A. (1986). Current empirical research on evaluation utilization. Review of Educational Research, 56(3), 331-364.
28. Crano, W. D. (2003). Theory-driven evaluation and construct validity. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 111-142). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. W. (2005). Organization development and change (8th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.
30. Davidson, E. J. (2005). Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Donaldson, S. I. (1995a). Worksite health promotion: A theory-driven, empirically based perspective. in L. R. Murphy, J. J. Hurrel, S. L. Sauter, & G. P. Keita (Eds.), Job stress interventions (pp. 73-90). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
32. Donaldson, S. I. (1995b). Peer influence on adolescent drug use: A perspective from the trenches of experimental evaluation research. American Psychologist, 50, 801-802.
33. Donaldson, S. I. (2001a). Mediator and moderator analysis in program development. in S. Sussman (Ed.), Handbook of program development for health behavior research (pp. 470-496). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
34. Donaldson, S. I. (2001b). Overcoming our negative reputation: Evaluation becomes known as a helping profession. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 355-361.
35. Donaldson, S. I. (2003). Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 111-142). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Donaldson, S. I. (2004). Using professional evaluation to improve the effectiveness of nonprofit organizations. in R. E. Riggio & S. Smith Orr (Eds.), Improving leadership in nonprofit organizations (pp. 234-251). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37. Donaldson, S. I. (2005). Using program theory-driven evaluation science to crack the Da Vinci Code. New Directions for Evaluation, 106, 65-84.
38. Donaldson, S. I., & Bligh, M. C. (2006). Rewarding careers applying positive psychological science to improve quality of work life and organizational effectiveness. in S. I. Donaldson, D. E. Berger, & K. Pezdek (Eds.), Applied psychology: New frontiers and rewarding careers (pp. 277-295). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Donaldson, S. I., & Christie, C. A. (2005). The 2004 Claremont Debate: Lipsey versus Scriven. Determining causality in program evaluation and applied research: Should experimental evidence be the gold standard? Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 3, 60-77.
40. Donaldson, S. I., & Christie, C. A. (2006). Emerging career opportunities in the transdiscipline of evaluation science. in S. I. Donaldson, D. E. Berger, & K. Pezdek (Eds.), Applied psychology: New frontiers and rewarding careers (pp. 243-259). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Donaldson, S. I., Christie, C. A., & Mark, M. M. (in press). What counts as credible evidence in evaluation and evidence-based practice? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42. Donaldson, S. I., & Gooler, L. E. (2001). Summary of the evaluation of The California Wellness Foundation’s Work and Health Initiative. Institute for Organizational and Program Evaluation Research, Claremont Graduate University, Cl arem ant, CA.
43. Donaldson, S. I., & Gooler, L. E. (2002). Theory-driven evaluation of the work and health initiative: A focus on winning new jobs. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3), 341-346.
44. Donaldson, S. I., & Gooler, L. E. (2003). Theory-driven evaluation in action: Lessons from a $20 million statewide work and health initiative. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26, 355-366.
45. Donaldson, S. I., Gooler, L. E., & Scriven, M. (2002). Strategies for managing evaluation anxiety: Toward a psychology of program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3), 261-273.
46. Donaldson, S. I., Gooler, L. E„ & Weiss, R. (1998). Promoting health and well-being through work: Science and practice. in X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Addressing community problems: Research and intervention (pp. 160-194). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
47. Donaldson, S. I., Graham, J. W., & Hansen, W. B. (1994). Testing the generaliz- ability of intervening mechanism theories: Understanding the effects of school-based substance use prevention interventions. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 17, 195-216.
48. Donaldson, S. I., Graham, J. W., Piccinin, A. M., & Hansen, W. B. (1995). Resistance- skills training and onset of alcohol use: Evidence for beneficial and potentially harmful effects in public schools and in private Catholic schools. Health Psychology, 14, 291-300.
49. Donaldson, S. I., & Lipsey, M. W. (2006). Roles for theory in contemporary evaluation practice: Developing practical knowledge. in I. F. Shaw, J. C. Greene, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), The Sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 56-75). London: Sage.
50. Donaldson, S. I., & Scriven, M. (2003a). Diverse visions for evaluation in the new millennium: Should we integrate or embrace diversity? in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 3-16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Donaldson, S. I. & Scriven, M. (Eds.). (2003b). Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Donaldson, S. I., Street, G., Sussman, S., & Tobler, N. (2001). Using meta-analyses to improve the design of interventions. in S. Sussman (Ed.), Handbook of program development for health behavior research and practice (pp. 449-466). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
53. Donaldson, S. I., & Weiss, R. (1998). Health, well-being, and organizational effectiveness in the virtual workplace. in M. Igbaria & M. Tan (Eds.), The virtual workplace (pp. 24-44). Harrisburg, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
54. Dooley, D., Fielding, J., & Levi, L. (1996). Health and unemployment. Annual Review of Public Health, 17, 449-465.
55. Dooley, D., & Prause, J. (1998). Underemployment and alcohol abuse in the national longitudinal survey of youth. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59, 669-680.
56. Eisenberg, L., Winters, L., & Alkin, M. C. (2005). The case: Bunche-Da Vinci Learning Partnership Academy. in M. C. Alkin & C. A. Christie (Eds.), Theorists' models in action: New directions for evaluation (Vol. 106, pp. 5-13). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
57. Employment Development Department. (2000, September). Unemployment rates. Retrieved September 1, 2000, from htt://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/dataanalysis/AreaSelection.asp?tableName=Labforce
58. Engle, M., & Altschuld, J. (2004). An update on university-based evaluation training. The Evaluation Exchange, IX(4), 9-10.
59. Fetterman, D. (2003). Empowerment evaluation strikes a responsive cord. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 63-76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
60. Fitzpatrick, J. L. (2002). Dialog with Stewart Donaldson. American Journal of Evaluation, 3(3), 347-365.
61. Fitzpatrick, J. L. (2004). Exemplars as case studies: Reflections on the links between theory, practice, and context. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(4), 541-559.
62. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Mark, M. M., & Christie, C. A. (in press). Exemplars in program evaluation practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen B. R. (2004). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
64. Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. London: Hogarth.
65. Funnell, S. (1997). Program logic: An adaptable tool for designing and evaluating programs. Evaluation News & Comment, 5-17.
66. Gargani, J. (2003, November). The history of theory-based evaluation: 1909 to 2003. Paper presented at the American Evaluation Association annual conference, Reno, NV.
67. Ghere, G., King, J. A., Stevahn, L., & Minnema, J. (2006). A professional development unit for reflecting on program evaluator competencies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 108-123.
68. Greene, J. C. (2005). A valued-engaged approach to evaluating the Bunche-Da Vinci Learning Academy. in M. C. Alkin & C. A. Christie (Eds.), Theorists’ models in action (pp. 27-46). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
69. Guiding Principles for Evaluators (1994). New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
70. Hansen, W. B. (1993). School-based alcohol prevention programs. Alcohol Health & Research World, 17, 54-60.
71. Hansen, W. B., & McNeal, Jr., R. B. (1996). The law of maximum expected potential effect: Constraints placed on program effectiveness by mediator relationships. Health Education Research, 11, 501-507.
72. Hasenfeld, Y. (1983). Human service organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
73. Henry, G. T. (2005). in pursuit of social betterment: A proposal to evaluate the Da Vinci Learning Model. in M. C. Alkin & C. A. Christie (Eds.), Theorists’ models in action, (pp. 47-64). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
74. Henry, G. T., & Mark, M. M. (2003). Toward an agenda for research on evaluation. in C. A. Christie (Ed.), The practice-theory relationship in evaluation (pp. 69-80). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
75. House, E. R. (2003). Stakeholder bias. in C. A. Christie (Ed.), New directions for evaluation, No. 97 (pp. 53-56). San Franciso: Jossey-Bass.
76. Howard, A. (1995). A framework for work change (pp. 1-44). in A. Howard (Ed.), The changing nature of work (pp. 1-44). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
77. Jin, R. L., Shah, C. P., & Svoboda, T. J. (1999). The impact of unemployment on health: A review of the evidence. Journal of Public Health Policy, 18, 275-301.
78. Joint Committee on Standards for Education Evaluation (1994). The program evaluation standards: How to assess evaluations of educational programs. Thousand, Oaks, CA: Sage.
79. Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books.
80. King, J. A. (2005). A proposal to build evaluation capacity at the Bunch—Da Vinci Learning Partnership Academy. in M. C. Alkin & C. A. Christie (Eds.), Theorists’ models in action (pp. 85-98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
81. Levin, H. M., & McEwan, P. J. (2001). Cost-effectiveness analysis: Methods and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
82. Levy, S. (March 2001). Five years of strong economic growth: The impact on poverty, inequality, and work arrangements in California. The Future of Work and Health Program. The California Wellness Foundation, San Francisco, CA.
83. Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). Fourth generation evaluation in the new millennium. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 77-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
84. Lipsey, M. W. (1988). Practice and malpractice in evaluation research. Evaluation Practice, 9, 5-24.
85. Lipsey, M. W. (1990). Design sensitivity. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
86. Lipsey, M. W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 57, 5-38.
87. Lipsey, M. W., & Cordray, D. (2000). Evaluation methods for social intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 345-375.
88. Lipsey, M. W., Crosse, S., Dunkel, J., Pollard, J., & Stobart, G. (1985). Evaluation: The state of the art and the sorry state of the science. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 27, 7-28.
89. Lipsey, M. W., & Pollard, J. A. (1989). Driving toward theory in program evaluation: More models to choose from. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 317-328.
90. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181-1209.
91. London, M., & Greller, M. M. (1991). Invited contribution: Demographic trends and vocational behavior: A twenty year retrospective and agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 28, 125-164.
92. Mark, M. M. (2003). Toward an integrative view of the theory and practice of program and policy evaluation. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 183-204). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
93. Mark, M. M., Henry, G. T., & Julnes, G. (2000). Evaluation: An integrative framework for understanding guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
94. Marmot, M. G. (1998). Social differentials in health within and between populations. Daedelus: Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts, 123, 197-216.
95. McLaughlin, J. A., & Jordon, G. B. (1999). Logic models: A tool for telling your program’s performance story. Evaluation and Program Planning, 22(1) 65-72.
96. Mercier, C., Piat, M., Peladeau, N., & Dagenais, C. (2000). An application of theory- driven evaluation to a drop-in youth center. Evaluation Review, 24, 73-91.
97. Mertens, D. M. (2003). The inclusive view of evaluation: Visions for the new millennium. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 91-108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
98. Mertens, D. M. (2005). The inauguration of the international organization for cooperation in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1), 124-130.
99. Mouton, J., & Wildschut, L. (2006). Theory driven realist evaluation. in R. Basson, C. Potter, & M. Mark (Eds.), Internationalizing evaluation: Reflections on evaluation approaches and their use globally using South Africa as a case example. Manuscript in preparation.
100. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
101. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Evaluation, knowledge management, best practices, and high quality lessons learned. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 329-336.
102. Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. (1997). Realist evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
103. Pelletier, K. (1993). A review and analysis of the health and cost-effective outcome studies of comprehensive health promotion and disease prevention programs at the worksite, 1991-1995 update. American Journal of Health Promotion, 8, 380-388.
104. Quick, J., Murphy, L. R., Hurrell, J., & Orman, D. (1992). The value of work, the risk of distress, and the power of prevention. in J. Quick, L. Murphy, & J. Hurrell, Jr. (Eds.), Stress and well-being at work. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
105. Reichhart, C., & Rallis, C. S. (Eds.). (1994). The qualitative-quantitative debate: New perspectives. New Directions for Program Evaluation, p. 61.
106. Renger, R., & Titcomb, A. (2002). A three-step approach to teaching logic models. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(4), 493-503.
107. Reynolds, A. J. (1998). Confirmatory program evaluation: A method for strengthening causal inference. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 203-221.
108. Rossi, P. H. (2004). My views of evaluation and their origins. in M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation roots (pp. 122-131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
109. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
110. Rousseau, D. M. (1996). Changing the deal while keeping people. Academy of Management Executive, 10, 50-59.
111. Russon, C. (2004). Cross-cutting issues in international standards development. New Directions for Evaluation, 104, 89-93.
112. Sanders, J. R. (2001). A vision for evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 363-366.
113. Schauffler, H., & Brown, R. (2000). The state of health insurance in California, 1999. Berkeley, CA: Regents of University of California.
114. Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
115. Scriven, M. (1998). Minimalist theory: The least theory that practice requires. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 57-70.
116. Scriven, M. (2003). Evaluation in the new millennium: The transdisciplinary vision. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 19-42). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
117. Seigart, D., & Brisolara, S. (2002). Feminist evaluation: Explorations and experiences. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
118. Shadish, W. R. (1993). Critical multiplism: A research strategy and its attendant tactics. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 60, 13-57.
119. Shadish, W. R. (1998). Presidential address: Evaluation theory is who we are. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 1-19.
120. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasiexperimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton- Mifflin.
121. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
122. Slater, J. K. (2006). Book review: Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 128-129.
123. Stame, N. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research & Practice, 10(1), 58-76.
124. Stern, E. (2004). What shapes European evaluation? A personal reflection. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research & Practice, 10(1), 7-15.
125. Stufflebeam, D. L. (Ed.). (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, 89. Sein Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
126. Thompson-Robinson, M., Hopson, R., & SenGupta, S. (Eds.). (2004). in search of cultural competence in evaluation: Toward principles and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
127. Tilley, N. (2004). Applying theory-driven evaluation to the British Crime Reduction Programme: The theories of the programme and of its evaluations. Criminal Justice: International Journal of Policy & Practice, 4(3), 255-276.
128. Triolli, T. (2004). Review of “Evaluating social program and problems: Visions for the new millennium.” Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(3), 82-88.
129. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1993). 1992 national survey of worksite health promotion activities: Summary. American Journal of Health Promotion, 7, 452-464.
130. van der Knaap, P. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and learning: Possibilities and challenges. Evaluation: The International Journal of Theory, Research & Practice, 10(1), 16-34.
131. Vinokur, A. D., van Ryn, M., Gramlich, E., & Price, R. H. (1991). Long-term follow- up and benefit-cost analysis of the JOBS program: A preventive intervention for the unemployed. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 213-219.
132. Weiss, C. H. (1997). How can theory-based evaluation make greater headway? Evaluation Review, 21, 501-524.
133. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
134. Weiss, C. H. (2004a). On theory-based evaluation: Winning friends and influencing people. The Evaluation Exchange, IX, 4, 1-5.
135. Weiss, C. H. (2004b). Rooting for evaluation: A cliff notes version of my work. in M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation roots (pp. 153-168). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
136. West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (1997). Toward understanding individual effects in multicomponent prevention programs: Design and analysis strategies. in K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 167-209). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
137. Wholey, J. S. (2003). Improving performance and accountability: Responding to emerging management challenges. in S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 43-62). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.