IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v5y1981i5p620-638.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mandated Evaluation in Community Mental Health Centers

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenie Walsh Flaherty

    (National Institute of Mental Health)

  • Charles Windle

    (National Institute of Mental Health)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenie Walsh Flaherty & Charles Windle, 1981. "Mandated Evaluation in Community Mental Health Centers," Evaluation Review, , vol. 5(5), pages 620-638, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:5:y:1981:i:5:p:620-638
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8100500503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8100500503
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8100500503?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tornatzky, Louis G., 1979. "The triple-threat evaluator," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 111-115, January.
    2. Windle, Charles & Neigher, William, 1978. "Ethical problems in program evaluation: Advice for trapped evaluators," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 97-107, January.
    3. Goltz, B. & Rusk, T.N. & Sternbach, R.A., 1973. "A built-in evaluation system in a new community mental health program," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 63(8), pages 702-709.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Morris & Robin Cohn, 1993. "Program Evaluators and Ethical Challenges," Evaluation Review, , vol. 17(6), pages 621-642, December.
    2. William D. Neigher & Herbert C. Schulberg, 1982. "Evaluating the Outcomes of Human Service Programs," Evaluation Review, , vol. 6(6), pages 731-752, December.
    3. Sherri N. Sheinfeld & Gary L. Lord, 1981. "The Ethics of Evaluation Researchers," Evaluation Review, , vol. 5(3), pages 377-391, June.
    4. Cherniss, Cary & Fishman, Daniel B., 2004. "The Mesquite `MicroSociety' school: identifying organizational factors that facilitate successful adoption of an innovative program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 79-88, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:5:y:1981:i:5:p:620-638. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.