The emphasis on understanding how a program works and what makes a program work led to the development of the theory-driven approach to program evaluation. Theory plays a major role in guiding a program design and evaluation. The theory defines the presenting problem and the target population for whom the program is designed, specifies the causal processes underlying the program effects, and identifies its expected outcomes as well as factors that affect treatment processes. In this article, a conceptual framework is presented as a tool for putting the program theory into operation. The framework incorporates variables that reflect theoretical concepts and implementation issues addressed in program evaluation. The framework organizes the variables into three categories: input, process, and output, and proposes direct and indirect relationships among them. Implications of the framework for program evaluation are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beutler, L. E. (1991). Have all won and must all have prizes? Revisiting Luborsky et al.’s verdict. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59 (2), 226-232.
2.
Bickman, L. (1987). Using program theory in evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Bickman, L. (1985). Improving established statewide programs. A component theory of evaluation. Evaluation Review, 9 (2), 189-208.
4.
Braden, C. J., Mishel, M. H., Longman, A., & Burns, L. R. (1989). A self-help intervention project in breast cancer treatment. Research project funded by the National Cancer Institute.
5.
Campbell, A. (1981). The sense of well-being in America. Recent patterns and trends. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
6.
Chen, H. T. (1994). Current trends and future directions in program evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 15 (3), 229-238.
7.
Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury-Park, CA: Sage.
8.
Cook, T. D. (1993). A quasi-sampling theory of the generalization of causal relationships. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 57, 39-82.
9.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
10.
Cook, T. J. & Poole, W. K. (1982). Treatment implementation and statistical power. A research note. Evaluation Review, 6 (3), 425-430.
11.
Costner, H. L. (1989). The validity of conclusions in evaluation research: A further development of Chen and Rossi’s theory-driven approach. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 345-353.
12.
Donovan, K., Sansen-Fisher, R. W., & Redman, S. (1989). Measuring quality of life in cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 7, 959-968.
13.
Finney, J. W., & Moos, R. H. (1984). Environmental assessment and evaluation research: Examples from mental health and substance abuse programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 7, 151-167.
14.
Finney, J. W., & Moos, R. H. (1989). Theory and method in treatment evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 307-316.
15.
Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., & Morris, L. L. (1975). Theory-based evaluation. Evaluation Comment, 5 (1), 1-4.
16.
Johnson, J. B., & Kelly, A. W. (1990). A multifaceted rehabilitation program for women with cancer. Oncology Nursing Forum, 17 (5), 691-695.
17.
Judd, C. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis. Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5 (5), 602-619.
18.
Lipsey, M. W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 57, 5-38.
19.
Marfo, K., & Dinero, T. E. (1993). Assessing early intervention outcomes: Beyond program variables. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 38 (3), 289-303.
20.
McEvoy, M. D., & McCorkle, R. (1990). Quality of life issues in patients with disseminated breast cancer. Cancer, 66 (Suppl), 1416-1421.
21.
Payne, S. A. (1992). A study of life in cancer patients receiving palliative chemotherapy. Social Science and Medicine, 35 (12): 1505-1509.
22.
Quay, H. C. (1979). The three faces of evaluation: What can be expected to work. In, L. Sechrest, S. G. West, M. S. Phillips, R. Radner, & W. Keaton (Eds.), Evaluation studies review annual, Vol 4. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
23.
Reid, W. J., & Hanrahan, P. (1988). Measuring implementation of social treatment. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 40, 93-111.
24.
Reynolds, A. J. (1998). Confirmatory program evaluation: A method for strengthening causal inference. American Journal of Evaluation, 19 (2), 203-221.
25.
Rezmovic, E. L. (1984). Assessing treatment implementation amid the slings and arrows of reality. Evaluation Review, 8 (2), 187-204.
26.
Rosen, A., & Proctor, E. K. (1978). Specifying the treatment process: The basis for effectiveness research. Journal of Social Service Research, 2 (1), 25-43.
27.
Rossi, P. H., & Freeman, H. E. (1993). Evaluation. A systematic approach (5th ed). Newburry Park, CA: Sage.
28.
Rossi, P. H., & Freeman, H. E. (1985). Evaluation: A systematic approach (3rd ed). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29.
Scott, A. G., & Sechrest, L. (1989). Strength of theory and theory of strength. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 329-336.
30.
Sechrest, L., Ametrano, D., & Ametrano, I. M. (1983). Evaluations of social programs. In C. E. Walker (Ed.), The handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 129-166). Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
31.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newburry Park, CA: Sage.
32.
Shonkhoff, J. P., Hause-Cramm, P., Krauss, M. W., & Upshur, C. C. (1988). Early intervention efficacy research: What have we learned and where do we go from here?TEVSE, 8 (1), 81-93.
33.
Sidani, S. (1994). Empirical testing of a conceptual model to evaluate psychoeducational interventions. Dissertation abstract.
34.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971). The use of experimental design in educational evaluation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 8 (4), 267-274.
35.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1967). The use and abuse of evaluation in title III. Theory into Practice, 6, 126-133.
36.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1966). A depth study of the evaluation requirement. Theory into Practice, 5, 121-133.
37.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic evaluation: A self-instructional guide to theory and practice. Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
38.
Suchman, E. A. (1967). Evaluative research: Principles and practice in public services and social action programs. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
39.
Trochim, W. N. K. (1985). Pattern matching, validity, and conceptualization in program evaluation. Evaluation Review, 9 (5), 575-604.
40.
van Hoozer, H. L., Bratton, B. D., Ostmoe, P. M., Weinholtz, D., Craft, M. J., Gjerde, C. L., & Albanese, M. A. (1987). The teaching process: Theory and practice in nursing. Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
41.
Weiss, C. H. (1972). Evaluation research: Methods of assessing program effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
42.
Worthen, B. R. (1996). The origins of theory-based evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 17 (2), 169-171.
43.
Yeaton, W. H., & Sechrest, L. (1981). Critical dimensions in the choice and maintenance of successful treatments: Strength, integrity, and effectiveness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49 (2), 156-167.
