 | Staff attitude toward evaluation
 | enthusiasm |
| resistance |
|
| Staff knowledge of evaluation
| knows virtually nothing |
| highly knowledgeable |
|
| Program interaction patterns (admin-staff, staff-staff,
staff-client)
| cooperative |
| conflict-laden |
|
| Program’s prior evaluation history
| first time ever |
| seemingly endless experience |
|
| Staff and client education levels
| high |
| low |
|
| Staff and/or client characteristics
| homogeneous groups |
| heterogeneous groups |
|
| Program location
| one site |
| multiple sites |
|
| Resources available for evaluation
| no money to speak of |
| lots of money |
|
| Number of sources of program funding
| one funding source |
| complex and multidimensional |
|
| Nature of the program treatment
| simple and unidimensional |
| complex and multidimensional |
|
| Standardization of treatment
| highly standardized and routine |
| highly individualized and nonroutine |
|
| Program organizational decision-making structure
| horizontal, little hierarchy, little stratification |
| hierarchical, long chain of command, stratified |
|
| Clarity about evaluation purpose and function
| well-articulated, specifically define |
| ambiguous, broadly defined |
|
| Existing data on program
| operating information system |
| no existing data |
|
| Evaluator(s)’ relationship to the program
| external |
| internal |
|
| Impetus for the evaluation
| voluntary, self-initiated |
| required, forced on program |
|
| Time available for the evaluation
| long time line, open |
| short time line, fixed deadline |
|
