Abstract
The burgeoning performance management movement, with its emphasis on social program ‘results’ measured typically by a limited set of quantitative indicators, has developed a life of its own largely apart from the evaluation research movement. Reflecting the differences in the professional history, interests and training underlying the two movements, the relationship between these disparate approaches to establishing public accountability has lacked coordination and defied integration. This article discusses the basic concepts guiding the evolution of these movements in the context of the goals of information production, and explores the major conceptual, measurement and methodological problems resulting from the lack of accommodation between them. It also provides suggestions about how these two important approaches can be better integrated, both professionally and organizationally, for the purpose of enhancing the reliability and validity of social program assessments, and therefore for improving policy development and program management.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: