STAFF MEMBERS WHO WORK WITH DRUG ABUSERS OFTEN HAVE A LIMITED SCOPE OF THE PROBLEMS SINCE MANY ARE GRADUATES OF THE TREATMENT PROGRAMS THEMSELVES. IN ADDITION, MANY OF THE MEMBERS OFTEN HAVE A STRONG BIAS AGAINST STATISTICAL ANALYSIS. THESE ARE FACTORS WHICH LEAD TO THE FAULTY RECORDKEEPING IN MOST TREATMENT PROGRAMS, ALONG WITH A FAILURE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF RECORDKEEPING AND REVIEW PROCESSES. THIS LACK OF RECORDKEEPING IS A GREAT OBSTACLE TO EVALUATION AND OFTEN SETS UP MUTUAL ANTAGONISM BETWEEN THE STAFF MEMBERS AND THE RESEARCHER. BECAUSE FUNDING AGENCIES ARE GENERALLY HIGHLY POLITICAL IN NATURE, THERE IS USUALLY COMPETITION BETWEEN DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMS. EVALUATIONS OF THESE PROGRAMS IS PROMPTED BY POLITICAL REASONS, AND THERE IS OFTEN A TENDENCY TO USE ONLY COST ANALYSIS. A BIAS TOWARDS CERTAIN KINDS OF TREATMENT USUALLY INFLUENCES RESULTS. THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION FACING THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY IN EVALUATION IS THE SELECTION OF THE PROPER RESEARCH TOOLS AND METHODOLOGY: THE DIRECT APPLICATION OF RESEARCH MODELS WILL REQUIRE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAREFULLY WORKED OUT EMPIRICAL STRATEGIES. THE SERVICES OF RESEARCH PERSONNEL CAN BE MOST EFFECTIVE WHEN THEY ACT AS INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT RESULTS OF EVALUATIONS BE COMMUNICATED DIRECTLY TO TREATMENT PROGRAMS NATIONWIDE, AND THAT TRADITIONAL METHODS OF EVALUATION BE USED. FUNDING AGENCIES SHOULD GIVE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO PROGRAMS TO ENABLE THEM TO SET UP INTERNAL PROGRAM MONITORING PROCEDURES. IT IS ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT COOPERATION BE ENCOURAGED BETWEEN FUNDED AGENCY STAFF MEMBERS, THAT ORIENTATION AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS ON DRUG ABUSE TREATMENT BE ARRANGED FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, AND THAT UNIFORM, INNOVATIVE CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION BE ESTABLISHED. EVALUATION SHOULD BE CONDUCTED BY INDEPENDENT RESEARCHERS, AND PROMPTED BY NONPOLITICAL MOTIVES. (DAG)