The document discusses the final stage of the policy process, which is the evaluation of policy to assess its content, implementation, and effects throughout the process using various methods like systematic evaluation; however, policy evaluation faces challenges like uncertainty over goals and difficulty determining causality due to diffuse impacts. Proper policy evaluation is important to provide an understanding of a policy's actual impact and inform decision-making.

4. The final stage of the policy process is the evaluation of
policy. Actually, it occurs throughout the policy process
as we have to estimate, assesssment, or appraisal of
policy which include its content, implementation and
effect.

5. - Evaluation is usually to estimate the
consequences of various policy alternatives for
dealing with a problem prior to adopting.
-Evaluation activities may restart the policy
process in order to continue, modify,
strengthen, or terminate a policy.
-Many of these judgments often based on
anecdotal or fragmentary evidences at best and
strongly influenced by ideological, partisan self-
interest and other evaluational criteria.
-Another common variety of evaluation centers
on the operation or administration of a policy.

6. Questions asked may include:
Is the program honestly run?
What are its financial cost?
Who receives benefits and in what
amount?
Were legal standards and procedure
followed?
This kind of evaluation may tell us
something about honesty or efficiency in
the conduct of a program.

7.  New type of policy evaluation is the systematic, objective
evaluation of programs to measure their societal impact and
the extent to which they are achieving their stated objectives.
We refer this type of evaluation as
“Systematic Evaluation”.
 Systematic evaluation directs attention to the effects a policy
has on the public need or problem to which it is directed.
 Systematic evaluation gives policymakers and the general
public some notion about the actual impact of policy and
provides discussions of policy with some grounding in reality.

9. The impact of policy may have several dimensions:
1. Policies affect the public problem at which they are directed and people
involved. Those whom the policy is intended to affect must be defined, whether they are
the poor, small-business people, disadvantaged schoolchildren, petroleum producer, or
whomever. The intended effect of the policy must then be determined. Further, policy may
have either intended or unintended consequences, or even both.
2. Policy may effect situations or groups other than those at which they are directed.
These are called “third-party effects, spillover effects, or externalities”.
3. Policies have consequences on future as well as current conditions, and for some
policies most of their benefits or some of their costs may occur in the far future.
4. The costs of policies are another element for evaluation. It is fairly easy to calculate
the direct dollar costs for the governmental implementation of policy.
5. It is also difficult to measure the indirect benefits of public policies for the community.
The analysis of public policy is usually focused upon what government
actually do, why and with what material effects.

10. Problems in
Policy Evaluation
The most useful form of policy evaluation is systematic evaluation
that tries to determine cause-and-effect relationships and
rigorously measure the results of policy.
“ measure rigorously” means to seek to assess policy impacts as
carefully and objectively as possible.
Determining whether a policy is doing what it is supposed to do,
is not an easy task as a number of conditions create obstacles or
problems for effective accomplishment of policy evaluation.
These problems include:
- Uncertainty over policy goals
- Difficulty in Determining Causality
- Diffuse Policy Impacts
- Difficulty in Data Acquisition
- Official Resistance
- A Limited Time Perspective
- Evaluation Lacks Influence

11. -To evaluate program
-Intercession with agencies
and report to congress
-Committee hearing& investigation
-GAO will produce
-Appropriation process
several hundred
-Approval of presidential appointment
evaluation studies
-Committee staffs studies
Congressional General
Oversight Accounting
Office
Presidential Administrative
-As an instrument Commissions Agencies
of policy evaluation
-Set up specially evaluate -Wanna get some notion
policy e.g. finding fact, of how their programs are
making policy working and what can be
recommendation, or simply done to improve them
creating the appearance of -May lead to major
presidential concern. program change

13. The Politics of Evaluation:
The Case of Head Start
Head Start program was intended to help overcome
the effects of poverty on the educational
achievement of poor children. Head Start program
was highly popular, undoubtedly because it directed
attention to poor preschool children.
It was designed to provide poor children with
physical and mental health services together with
meals to improve their diet. However, this case
study can be considered as a good one because in
terms of its methodological and conceptual base.
I suggest you all to look for its whole story for your
more understanding.

14. There are suggestive reasons why public policies either do not achieve
their goals or do not have impact on public problems that they are
expected to have, as followings:
1. Inadequate resources may be provided for implementating a policy.
2. Policies may be administered so as to lessen their potential effect.
3. Public problems are often caused by multiple factors, but policy may
be directed at only one or a few of them.
4. People may respond or adapt to public policies in a manner that
negates some of their influence.
5. Policy may have incompatible goals that bring them to conflict with
one another.
6. Solutions for some problems may involve cost and consequences
greater than people are willing to accept.
7. Public problems can not be solved or at least not completely.
8. New problems may araise that distract attention and action from a
problem.
9. Many national policies and programs in such as education,
environmental protection, economic development and social welfare,
are actually implemented by state- and local-government agencies.

15. . The proposition here advanced is that the response to policies,
and demands for changes will be affected by the way in which their
benefits and costs are distributed or are perceived to be distributed.
-Broad benefits and Broad Costs
Policies that involve broad distribution of costs and
benefits e.g. Social security, Highway construction,
Police & Fire protection, Public education and
National defense.
-Broad Benefits and Narrow Costs
Policies that provide benefits for large no. of people
but costs at least initially fall primarily upon fairly
distinct e.g. control of environmental pollution,
automobile safety, inspection of food and meat,
regulation of public utilities and safety,
policies for industry and coal mine.

16. CONT’D
-Narrow Benefits and Broad Costs
-Policies benefit readily identifiable interest groups, though
the burden of their costs falls upon taxpayers e.g. veterans’
benefits, agricultural subsidies, hospital-construction grants,
rivers and harbors projects and special tax provisions.
-Narrow Benefits and Narrow Costs
Policies that provide benefit to a well-defined group but at the
cost of another distint group tend to product continuing
organized conflict among groups and their partisans
e.g. commercial banks and saving and loan associations over
banking policies.

17. - Policy termination is a severe action with unpleasant
and negative connotation.
- The evaluation and appraisal of a policy ,
dissatisfaction with its cost and consequences, and
development and proliferation of political opposition
may lead to its termination.
- Policy termination is difficult for a number of
reasons.
However, problems in connection with current policies
may be identified, alternatives formulated, and so on,
until the policy is modified in some way. The policy
may also be so administered as to make it more
acceptable. Whether legislative or administrative in
origin, policy change is more likely than termination.