Summary: Since program evaluation is too broad a concept to discuss in generalities, remarks were directed toward issues and practices in three basic categories: (1) evaluation policy, (2) management of evaluation functions, and (3) capacity-building for doing and using evaluation. Although no formal declaration of State governmentwide policy for program evaluation efforts emanated from the Governor's office during the Reagan administration, each executive agency was expected to employ appropriate and effective management practices to assure implementation of the administration's policies. A similar arrangement should hold true during the Reagan Presidency concerning the various departments. In the last 2 years of the gubernatorial administration, there was an effort to expand the scope of program evaluation efforts horizontally across State departments and agencies in order to examine the cross-program impacts and side effects being experienced in different policy and program areas. The present Administration would appear to have a need of evaluation activities of a similar horizontal scope to assist the cabinet councils in formulating Administration policy since each cabinet council is dealing with different policy clusters and many related programs simultaneously. Evaluation functions during the Reagan era in California were highly decentralized, which was a reflection of the basic philosophy that since executive department heads are responsible for success in policy implementation, they should decide how best to organize their respective evaluation functions to meet management and decisionmaking needs. One significant concern that has been expressed is whether States and localities have the management muscle and evaluative capability to do and use program evaluation in ways that will help them to distinguish between various policy and program alternatives. With the curtailment of extensive direct Federal presence in program evaluation activities come the withdrawal pains not unlike those being experienced in conjunction with Federal budget cuts in domestic programs. Clearly, the Federal Government will share successful evaluation practices and information with State and local governments, but it will be up to the evaluation community to convince these State and local policymakers that evaluation is needed and can be supported out of the savings realized through improved effectiveness and elimination of ineffective publicly supported programs.
