Abstract
Experience with federally mandated Community Mental Health Center (CMHC) program evaluation (P.L. 94-63) is examined in terms of three issues: (1) the purposes which evaluation serves; (2) the values about evaluation held by key participants; and (3) limitations in both evaluation technology and CMHC context and resources. Eight generic principles for government role in evaluation are derivedfrom this experience. The principles suggest two different roles—accountability to the public and program amelioration. Government requirements should be concerned solely with the former. Specific recommendations for implementing these two roles are given.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
