IN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARISING AMONG EVALUATORS, PROGRAM STAFFS, PROGRAM MANAGERS, THE PUBLIC, GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES, AND PROFESSIONAL PEERS ARE DESCRIBED IN DETAIL. THIS ARTICLE FURTHER EXAMINES THESE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND DETAILS WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS WHEN EVALUATORS TRY TO USE A SCIENTIFIC MODEL, A SOCIAL-CRITIC MODEL, A PLANNING MODEL, AN EFFICIENCY MODEL, OR A POLITICAL MODEL. THE SCIENTIFIC MODEL ATTEMPTS TO DETERMINE THE 'EFFICACY' OR USEFULNESS OF A PROCEDURE. THE EFFICIENCY MODEL ATTEMPTS TO DETERMINE THE PROGRAM'S MANAGERIAL EFFICIENCY. THE PLANNING MODEL ATTEMPTS TO DEFINE AREAS WICH NEED IMPROVEMENT, WHILE THE SOCIAL-CRITIC MODEL BECOMES AN ADVOCATE OF THE PROGRAM'S CLIENTS. THE POLITICAL MODEL IS NO EVALUATION AT ALL BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, IS COMMON. THE PROBLEMS OF CONSCIENCE VERSUS POLITICS AND OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD VERSUS SOCIAL REALTIY ARE DISCUSSED. EVALUATORS ARE URGED TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN EFFICACY AND EFFICENCY, BECAUSE THERE IS NO USE HAVING AN EFFICIENT, INEFFECTIVE PROGRAM. THEY ARE ALSO URGED TO STATE GOALS CLEARLY, TO BE AWARE OF SECONDARY AND TERTIARY EFFECTS, TO KNOW THAT POLITICS WILL ENTER IN, AND NEVER TO WORK FOR A TRAPPED ADMINISTRATOR WHO FEELS A FAVORABLE EVALUATION IS ESSENTIAL. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (GLR)