AFTER STATING THAT PROBABLY ONLY $0.2 MILLION'S WORTH OF EFFECTIVE EVALUATION IS ACHIEVED FROM THE ROUGHLY $200 MILLION SPENT ANNUALLY TO EVALUATE THE $200 BILLION WORTH OF SOCIAL PROGRAMS FUNDED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THIS CRITIQUE EXAMINES WEAKNESSES IN THE EVALUATION PROCESS. THE WEAKEST LINK IS CALLED THE COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS. BECAUSE FINDINGS ARE OFTEN NOT IMPLEMENTED, AND POLICYMAKERS ASSUME THEY HAVE LOW UTILITY, THE RATE OF CRITICAL FEEDBACK TO RESEARCHERS IS SLOW. THIS HINDERS IMPROVEMENT OF EVALUATION METHODOLOGY SINCE FUNDS AND MANPOWER ARE IN LIMITED SUPPLY. THE PASSIVE BIAS INTRODUCED BY THE RESEARCHER'S DISCIPLINE IS ALSO DISCUSSED. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT STATISTICALLY ORIENTED RESEARCHERS TEND NOT TO PUBLISH DATA BASED ON CASE STUDIES WHILE OTHERS MAY NOT RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF FINDINGS NOT BASED ON LONGITUDINAL DATA. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT ALL FINDINGS BE PUBLISHED, EVEN THOSE WHICH THE RESEARCHER FINDS CONTRADICTORY OR INCONCLUSIVE. CLIENT CONTROL OF THE INFORMATION IS ALSO DISCUSSED. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT RESEARCHERS WHO ARE NOT LOYAL TO THEIR CLIENTS DO NOT GET ADDITIONAL CONTRACTS. THIS LEADS CONGRESS AND OTHERS TO DOUBT THE VALIDITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY EVALUATIONS. A CALL IS MADE FOR GREATER FORTHRIGHTNESS IN RESEARCH AND DISSEMINATION. (GLR)