Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation

Edited by Isabelle Bourgeois

Published Triannually | ISSN 0834-1516

Join the conversation
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email

The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation is published three times a year by the CES.

It seeks to promote the theory and practice of program evaluation in Canada by publishing:

Articles on all aspects of the theory and practice of evaluation, including methodology, evaluation standards, implementation of evaluations, reporting and use of studies, and the audit or meta-evaluation of evaluation.

Addressing Challenges in Evaluation Practice articles presenting real-life cases by evaluation practitioners.

Evaluation Practice Notes on all aspects of evaluation practice with the goal of sharing practical knowledge, experiences and lessons learned of benefit to the evaluation community.

Book Reviews that provide a critique of authored and edited volumes of interest and relevance to the evaluation field.

Continue Reading Read Less
  • Editorial board

    Editor-in-chief / Rédactrice en chef

    Isabelle Bourgeois, Ph.D.
    Associate Professor, École national d’administration publique
    Université du Québec
    (819) 771–6095 ext. 2231
    isabelle.bourgeois@enap.ca

    French Language Editor / Rédactrice associé francophone

    Astrid Brousselle, Ph.D.
    Director, School of Public Administration
    University of Victoria
    astrid@uvic.ca

    Associate Editor / Rédactrice associé

    Jill Anne Chouinard, Ph.D.
    Assistant Professor
    University of North Carolina at Greensboro
    agchouin@uncg.edu

    Book Review Editor / Rédactrice, Comptes rendus de livres

    Jane Whynot
    University of Ottawa
    jwhyn021@uottawa.ca

    Editorial Assistant / Adjoint à la rédaction

    Emily Taylor
    Ontario Tobacco Research Unit
    University of Toronto
    emily_taylor@camh.ca

    Editorial Board / Comité de rédaction

    Courtney Amo
    A/Director, Evaluation and Risk Directorate; Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA), Government of Canada

    Tim Aubry
    School of Psychology, University of Ottawa

    Ilsa N. Blidner
    Consultant, Toronto

    Paul Brandon
    College of Education, University of Hawaii

    Brad Cousins
    Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa

    Nathalie Dubois
    École nationale d’administration publique

    Paul Favaro
    Chief of Assessment and Accountability, Peel Board of Education

    Swee Goh
    School of Management, University of Ottawa

    Christophe Kellerhals
    Secrétaire permanent de la Commission externe d’évaluation des politiques publiques du canton de Genève (CEPP)

    Marlène Laeubli
    Consultant, Switzerland

    Chris Lovato
    University of British Columbia

    Charles Lusthaus
    Consultant, Montréal

    John Mayne
    Consultant, Ottawa

    James McDavid
    School of Public Administration, University of Victoria

    Céline Mercier
    Centre de réadaptation Lisette Dupras, Lachine

    Anita Myers
    Department of Health Studies, University of Waterloo

    Michael Obrecht
    Canadian Institutes of Health Research

    John Owen
    Centre for Program Evaluation, University of Melbourne

    Burt Perrin
    Consultant, France

    Cheryl Poth
    University of Alberta

    Hallie Preskill
    Executive Director, FSG Social Impact Consultants, San Francisco

    Lucie Richard
    Faculté des sciences infi rmières, Université de Montréal

    Valéry Ridde
    Faculté de médecine, Université Laval

    Ray C. Rist
    The World Bank, Washington, D.C.

    Mark Seasons
    School of Planning, University of Waterloo

    Robert V. Segsworth
    Department of Political Science, Laurentian University

    Souraya Sidani
    Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto

    Nick L. Smith
    School of Education, Syracuse University

    Sanjeev Sridharan
    Health Policy Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto

    Rosalie Torres
    Developmental Studies Center, Oakland

    Sue Weinstein
    Consultant, Toronto

  • Abstracting and indexing

  • Author resources

    Peer Review Process

    All submitted manuscripts will be subject to a double blind peer review by up to four expert members of the evaluation research community. Authors are required to ensure that all clues to their identity are removed from manuscripts submitted for potential publication. Copies of the reviewers’ comments will be sent to authors with identities withheld.

    The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation judges a submission's suitability for publication in the journal (using the ranking scale: not applicable, excellent, good adequate, marginal, poor) as based on these criteria:

    • Significance of topic
    • Literature review
    • Conceptualization
    • Methodology
    • Data analyses
    • Interpretation
    • Clarity of presentation
    • Validity of conclusions
    • Reader interest

    Author Submission Guidelines

    Articles
    Submitted manuscripts will be evaluated in relation to:

    • Relevance to the Canadian context in respect to either the programs subjected to evaluation or issues applicable to the practice of evaluation in Canada and elsewhere
    • Clarity and conciseness, articles of less than 6,000 words are encouraged;
    • Originality;
    • The mix of theoretical, methodological, and reported findings available for publication in any particular issue of the Journal.
    • Addressing Challenges in Evaluation Practices

    We encourage submissions that highlight real-life challenges encountered in evaluation design, conduct, reporting, knowledge transfer, and utilization. Rich descriptions of challenges and of approaches to addressing challenges are invited. Articles must include the following three sections and provide answers to all of the following "interview" questions:

    • Description of Case and Evaluation Content
    • Why was the evaluation conducted? What did the client want to learn?
    • What resources (time, money, in-kind, etc.) were available for conducting the evaluation? Were they suitable for answering the evaluation questions?
    • Description of Challenges and how they Impede the Evaluation Process?
    • What challenges did you face in conducting this evaluation?
    • To what extent did you or could you have anticipated these challenges?
    • How did these challenges affect the implementation of the evaluation?
    • Description of how Challenges were addressed?
    • How did you address each of these challenges?
    • What should evaluators do to avoid these challenges to start off with?
    • What would you recommend for others faced with similar challenges?
    • What, if any, are the systemic issues that the evaluation community should address?

    Submissions must follow this general structure and be written as interview questions and answers. Authors may add additional "interview" questions. Authors should aim for 1,500 to 3,000 words. All submissions will be subject to blind peer review. Review comments connecting the case to evaluation research literature will be published alongside the article.

    Manuscript Submission Guidelines

    • Manuscripts may only be submitted in electronic format;
    • Manuscripts should not exceed a maximum of 6,000 words;
    • Manuscripts must include an abstract in both official languages of no more than 100 words;
    • All copy must be double spaced on 8.5 x 11 inch pages. One inch margins are required on all four sides;
    • All tables and figures must be numbered separately and grouped together at the end of the manuscript. Clearly visible notes within the text should indicate their approximate placement. Figures must also be submitted in individual JPG, TIF, or PDF files with a minimum of 300-dpi resolution;
    • Manuscripts must conform to the referencing format of the sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (2009). All authors of manuscripts accepted for publication that do not conform to APA style will be charged a copy-editing fee that must be paid before the manuscript is published.
    • Content footnotes are discouraged and should be used only when absolutely necessary;
    • All submitted manuscripts will be subject to blind review by up to four (4) expert members of the evaluation community. Authors are required to ensure that all clues to their identity are removed from manuscripts submitted for potential publication. Copies of reviewers' comments will be sent to all authors with identities withheld.

    Submission Preparation Checklist

    As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines:

    • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor);
    • The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format;
    • Where available, URLs for the references have been provided;
    • The text is double-spaced; uses a 12-point font and employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses);
    • All tables are numbered separately and grouped together at the end of the manuscript;
    • Illustrations and figures must be submitted under 'supplementary files' as individual JPG, TIF, or PDF files with a minimum of 300-dpi resolution;
    • Clearly visible notes within the text indicate the approximate placement of tables, illustrations and figures;
    • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines, which is found in About the Journal;
    • If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, the instructions in Ensuring a Blind Review have been followed.
  • Calls for papers

    Call for Papers

    Evaluation practitioners, researchers and theorists are invited to prepare and submit manuscripts for review and possible publication in The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, the peer-reviewed journal of the Canadian Evaluation Society. The Journal publishes:

    • Articles of up to 6,000 words (generally) on all aspects of the theory and practice of evaluation including methodology; standards of practice; strategies to enhance the implementation, reporting, and use of evaluations; and evaluation audits/meta-evaluations. Articles reporting original empirical research on evaluation are of particular interest.
    • Addressing Challenges in Evaluation Practice articles of between 1,500 and 3,000 words that present real-life cases by evaluation practitioners.
    • Evaluation Practice Notes of between 1,000 and 3,000 words all aspects of evaluation practice with the goal of sharing practical knowledge, experiences and lessons learned of benefit to the evaluation community.
    • Book Reviews of up to 1,000 words that provide a critique of authored and edited volumes of interest and relevance to the evaluation field.

    Articles are published in English or French. Authors should ensure that all clues as to their identity are removed from manuscripts prior to submission. Prospective contributors are invited to forward an electronic copy of their manuscript (double-spaced) to the Editor at cjpe@evaluationcanada.ca.