The management of public affairs in Italy today is characterized by a demand for transparency and accountability, and by a desire to learn to manage the instruments of intervention today available to society. This emphasizes the need to evaluate the effectiveness and the results of policies and programs, which is not, however, matched by adequate knowledge of the methods or by sufficiently creative approaches. This social deficit in evaluation has both a cultural and an organizational origin.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Chelimsky, E. (1995) ‘The Political Environment of Evaluation and What It Means for the Development of the Field’, Evaluation Practice, 16(3).
2.
Dipartimento della Funzione Pubblica (1995) Cento Progetti al Servizio del Cittadino.Roma: Dipartimento della Funzione Pubblica.
3.
Donabedian, A. (1990) La Qualità dell’Assistenza Sanitaria. Roma: NIS.
4.
House, E. R. (1993) Professional Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
5.
MEANS (1993) Methods to Give Meaning to the Evaluation Obligation. Bruxelles: Commission of European Communities, D.G. XVI.
6.
Osborne, D. and T. Gaebler (1992) Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
7.
Pollitt, C. (1995) ‘Justification by Works or by Faith? Evaluating the New Public Management’, Evaluation1(2): 133–154.
8.
Rossi, P. H. and H. E. Freeman (1989) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 4th edn. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9.
Weiss, C. (1987) ‘Where Politics and Evaluation Research Meet’, in D. J. Palumbo (ed.) The Politics of Program Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
