Causal models in program theory evaluation

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 2000, Issue 87, 2000, Pages 47-55

  Rogers, Patricia J ^a  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84995452143     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.1181     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Batterham, R., Dunt, D., and Disler, P. “Can We Achieve Accountability for Long-Term Outcomes?” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1996, 77, 1219–1225.
2. Bennett, C. F., and Rockwell, K. “Targeting Outcomes of Programs (TOP): A Hierarchy for Targeting Outcomes and Evaluating Their Achievement.”
3. [http://deal.unl.edu/TOP/synopsis.html]. 1999.
4. Bullen, P. “Evaluating Human Services: Complexity—Uncertainty—Self-Delusion—Rigour.” Evaluation News and Comment, 1995, 3(2), 3–10. [available at
5. http://www.mapl.com.au/A1.htm].
6. Chen, H. T. Theory-Driven Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1990.
7. Cooley, L. Presentation to the Washington Evaluators' Conference, 1997.
8. Funnell, S. “Program Logic: An Adaptable Tool.” Evaluation News and Comment, 1997, 6(1), 5–17.
9. Halpern, G. “From Hubris to Reality: Evaluating Innovative Programs in Public Institutions.” Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Nov. 1998, revised Nov. 1999. [available at
10. http://www.innovationcc/rev_arts/halp4.htm].
11. Lipsey, M. “Theory as Method: Small Theories of Treatments.” In L. Sechrest and A. Scott (eds.), Understanding Causes and Generalizing About Them. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 57. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.
12. Lipsey M., and Pollard, J. “Driving Toward Theory in Program Evaluation: More Models to Choose From.” Evaluation and Program Planning, 1989, 12, 317–328.
13. McClintock, C. “Administrators as Applied Theorists.” In L. Bickman (ed.), New Directions for Evaluation: Advances in Program Theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 47. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
14. McDonald, B., and Rogers, P. “Market Segmentation as an Analogy for Differentiated Program Theory: An Example from the Dairy Industry.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Orlando, Fla., 1999.
15. Owen, J. M., with Rogers, P. J. Program Evaluation: Forms and Approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1999.
16. Owen, J. M., and Lambert, F. C. “Roles for Evaluation in learning Organizations.” Evaluation, 1995, 1(2), 237–250.
17. Pawson, R., and Tilley, N. Realistic Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1997.
18. Plantz, M. C., Greenway, M. T., and Hendricks, M. “Outcome Measurement: Showing Results in the Nonprofit Sector.” In K. E. Newcomer (ed.), Using Performance Measurement to Improve Public and Nonprofit Programs. New Directions for Evaluation, no 75. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
19. Senge, P. M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday, 1990.
20. Weick, K. E. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1995.
21. Weiss, C. H. Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies. (2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.