Academics conduct unbiased research intended to determine which correctional programs achieve their objectives and why they are or are not effective in reaching their goals. Ideally, practitioners would then use these findings to design and implement programs that replicate the methods found by academics to be most fruitful in achieving correctional objectives. Often, however, this does not occur due to a lack of collaboration between academics and practitioners. This article provides guidelines for both academics and practitioners that can facilitate such a collaboration. Academics are advised to strengthen their partnerships with practitioners by including them in the development of evaluation plans and translating evaluation findings into practical suggestions for program improvement. Further, researchers should instruct practitioners in basic evaluation research goals and methodologies. This enables practitioners to be competent consumers of research studies and their findings. Researchers should also assess the effectiveness of current methods for disseminating information to practitioners. Direct contact with appropriate agencies is better than expecting practitioners to find relevant research in professional journals and other publications. Guidelines for practitioners in improving partnerships with academics include recognition that research is essential to the effective and efficient use of their time and resources; otherwise, they have no objective measure of whether their work is having its intended effect. Practitioners must also commit themselves to continuous quality improvement by creating a learning culture, choosing appropriate measures of program implementation and client performance, and using data for action planning. Practitioners must also supervise staff to ensure they are trained and guided to execute evidence-based structures and methods. 9 references